linux-kernel - Re: [SCSI][REGRESSION][BISECTED] Disk errors loop forever in 2.6.29

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <852441.94339.qm@web110616.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Date:	Thu, 19 Feb 2009 16:54:29 -0800 (PST)
From:	Sitsofe Wheeler <sitsofe@...oo.com>
To:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
Cc:	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rjw@...k.pl,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [SCSI][REGRESSION][BISECTED] Disk errors loop forever in 2.6.29

> From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>

> 
> Your specific behaviour change seems to be a bug in the way the rewrite
> is handling ABORTED_COMMAND.  Could you try the patch below (with or
> without the block patch, it shouldn't matter) and see if it gets you
> back to 2.6.28 behaviour?

Yup that patch makes things timeout quickly just like 2.6.28. The whole 
"it didn't used to cache failures" piece in the previous email seems to
have been a fabrication inside my own head - I checked and 2.6.28 caches
the failure until the cache is dropped too.

It might be worth turning your original patch into some sort of warning
stack trace trigger so that people understand it's just there for 
unwedging and isn't expected behaviour (it is useful for breaking out of
near lockups though).

Tested-by: Sitsofe Wheeler <sitsofe@...oo.com>

--
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/