linux-ext4 - Re: ext4: (2.6.34-rc4): This should not happen!! Data will be lost

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 16 Apr 2010 18:08:56 +0200
From:	Andre Noll <maan@...temlinux.org>
To:	Andrew Vasquez <andrew.vasquez@...gic.com>
Cc:	Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>,
	"linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Driver <Linux-Driver@...gic.com>,
	Thomas Helle <Helle@...bingen.mpg.de>
Subject: Re: ext4: (2.6.34-rc4): This should not happen!!  Data will be lost

On 08:52, Andrew Vasquez wrote:
> The driver here is simply reporting that the a command's timeout value
> had been exceeded and the mid-layer began error-recovery with a request
> to 'abort' the command.  The abort-request completed successfully:
> 
> 	qla2xxx 0000:06:09.0: scsi(0:0:0): Abort command issued -- 1 fa6a73 2002.
> 
> I can't explain why the storage did not complete the request in the
> allotted time.

Ah, that's valuable information, thanks. The underlying Infortrend
Raid System is rather old but worked without any problems for several
years. We recently replaced its 400G disks by new 2T WD disks. Maybe
the new disks have longer response times, could that be the reason? And
is there a way to increase the timeout value?

Andre
-- 
The only person who always got his work done by Friday was Robinson Crusoe

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (190 bytes)