[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20060725232924.GU6452@schatzie.adilger.int>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 17:29:24 -0600
From: Andreas Dilger <adilger@...sterfs.com>
To: Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@...il.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Hans Reiser <reiser@...esys.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>, reiserfs-dev@...esys.com,
reiserfs-list@...esys.com
Subject: Re: possible recursive locking detected - while running fs operations in loops - 2.6.18-rc2-git5
On Jul 26, 2006 00:16 +0200, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> What I did to provoke it was to run 6 different xterms (with a bash
> shell) with the following loops in them in a test directory that was
> initially empty :
>
> xterm1: while true; do mkdir a; done
> xterm2: while true; do rmdir a; done
> xterm3: while true; do touch a/foo; done
> xterm4: while true; do find .; done
> xterm5: while true; do sync; sleep 1; done
> xterm6: while true; do rm -r a; done
See racer test at ftp.lustre.org/pub/benchmarks/racer-lustre.tar.gz
It does the above, but a bunch more things and is a truly pathalogical
test script that does lots of "stupid user tricks", unlike normal tests
which are only doing operations that expect to be successful.
PS - during the racer.sh test run "rm" is known to segfault after hitting
an internal assertion, nobody is sure why.
PPS- I don't know who wrote this program, it was originally posted by
someone not the author to linux-fsdevel or something.
Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Principal Software Engineer
Cluster File Systems, Inc.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists