[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110524214222.GF26055@thunk.org>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 17:42:23 -0400
From: Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To: Surbhi Palande <surbhi.palande@...onical.com>
Cc: sandeen@...hat.com, jack@...e.cz, marco.stornelli@...il.com,
adilger.kernel@...ger.ca, toshi.okajima@...fujitsu.com,
m.mizuma@...fujitsu.com, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Attempt to sync the fsstress writes to a frozen F.S
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 10:10:41AM +0300, Surbhi Palande wrote:
> While the fsstress background writes are busy dirtying the page cache, if a
> fsfreeze happens then the background writes should stall. A sync should then
> not have any data to sync to the FS. If it does have any data to sync then
> sync will cause a deadlock by holding the s_umount write semaphore and waiting
> in the wait queue for the FS to thaw, whereas the F.S can never thaw without
> getting the s_umount write semaphore.
>
> Signed-off-by: Surbhi Palande <surbhi.palande@...onical.com>
Hi Surbhi,
Have you tried out Jan Kara's patches?
[1/3] fs: Create __block_page_mkwrite() helper passing error values back
[2/3] vfs: Block mmapped writes while the fs is frozen
[3/3] ext4: Rewrite ext4_page_mkwrite() to return locked page
Do these patches fix the problem you've been trying to fix with your
patches? I believe they should, but I would appreciate confirmation
that with these patches, you're no longer able to reproduce the
problem you've been concerned about.
Thanks, regards,
- Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists