[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1232612860.29604.57.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 08:27:40 +0000
From: Ian Campbell <ijc@...lion.org.uk>
To: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>
Cc: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>,
linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, Max Kellermann <mk@...all.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, gcosta@...hat.com,
Grant Coady <grant_lkml@...o.com.au>,
Tom Tucker <tom@...ngridcomputing.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] NFS regression in 2.6.26?, "task blocked for more
than 120 seconds"
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 16:26 -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>
> > > (Merged now, so testing mainline as of today should work too.)
> >
> > The server isn't really a machine I want to test random kernels on,
> is
> > there some subset of those changesets which it would be useful for
> me to
> > pull back onto the 2.6.26 kernel I'm using to test? (I can most like
> > manage the backporting myself).
> >
> > These two look like the relevant ones to me but I'm not sure:
> > 22945e4a1c7454c97f5d8aee1ef526c83fef3223 svc: Clean up deferred
> requests on transport destruction
> > 69b6ba3712b796a66595cfaf0a5ab4dfe1cf964a SUNRPC: Ensure the server
> closes sockets in a timely fashion
> >
> > I think 69b6 was in the set of three I tested previously and the
> other
> > two turned into 2294?
>
> Yep, exactly.--b.
The client machine now has an uptime of ten days without error after
these two patches were applied to the server.
Thanks everybody,
Ian.
--
Ian Campbell
I used to think that the brain was the most wonderful organ in
my body. Then I realized who was telling me this.
-- Emo Phillips
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (198 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists