[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <878835.60592.qm@web32603.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 02:45:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: Martin Knoblauch <knobi@...bisoft.de>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
tigran aivazian <tigran@...azian.fsnet.co.uk>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: Analyzed/Solved: Booting 2.6.30-rc2-git7 very slow
----- Original Message ----
> From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
> To: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
> Cc: Martin Knoblauch <knobi@...bisoft.de>; Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl>; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; tigran aivazian <tigran@...azian.fsnet.co.uk>; Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2009 10:17:55 AM
> Subject: Re: Analyzed/Solved: Booting 2.6.30-rc2-git7 very slow
>
> On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 05:51:36 +0200 Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2009-04-28 at 18:28 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Fri, 24 Apr 2009 05:45:19 -0700 (PDT) Martin Knoblauch
> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > OK, I just found the reason for both intel-ucode and tg3 failures.
> Apparently between 2.6.28 and 2.6.29 the mount of sysfs has subtely changed
> from:
> > > >
> > > > /sys /sys sysfs rw 0 0
> > > >
> > > > to:
> > > >
> > > > none /sys sysfs rw,relatime 0 0
> > >
> > > I assume that you're referring to the contents of /proc/mounts?
> > >
> > > > The "none" breaks the RHEL-4 provided hotplug script "firmware.agent"
> when it tries to parse the mount point for "/sys". As a result, the firmware
> loading is never properly finished and the driver(s) just timeout on the value
> in /sys/class/firmware/timeout. Bingo. Simple fix in user-pace possible - cool
> down Martin :-)
> > > >
> > > > Questions remains: was this intentional? It breaks existing userspace and
> should therefore be considered a regression - right? On the other hand, it will
> never be a problem for RHEL-4/5 kernels, unless the change in 2.6.29 gets
> backported. Any ideas?
> > >
> > > afaik that was unintentional and was probably a mistake.
> > >
> > > I wonder how we did that.
> >
> >
> > > [hotplug]# grep sysfs /proc/mounts
> > > none /sys sysfs rw,relatime 0 0
> > > /sys /sys sysfs rw,relatime 0 0
> >
> > ___(I wonder how the heck that is accomplished)
> >
>
> Beats me. I'm not seeing likely changes in fs/proc/base.c or around
> show_mountinfo(). Maybe sysfs broke in an ingenious way. (hopefully
> cc's viro).
>
> Displaying relatime seems a bit pointless too.
Hmm. I actually believe the "none" line comes out of /etc/fstab, but was never before displayed in /proc/mount.
This is from 2.6.19:
[root@...dm60 ~]# grep sysfs /etc/fstab
none /sys sysfs defaults 0 0
[root@...dm60 ~]# mount | grep sysfs
none on /sys type sysfs (rw)
[root@...dm60 ~]# grep sysfs /proc/mounts
/sys /sys sysfs rw 0 0
And this is from 2.6.30:
[root@...dm52 linux-2.6.30-rc3-git2]# grep sysfs /etc/fstab
none /sys sysfs defaults 0 0
[root@...dm52 linux-2.6.30-rc3-git2]# mount | grep sysfs
none on /sys type sysfs (rw)
[root@...dm52 linux-2.6.30-rc3-git2]# grep sysfs /proc/mounts
none /sys sysfs rw,relatime 0 0
/sys /sys sysfs rw,relatime 0 0
Any changes to mount-handling in 2.6.29?
Cheers
Martin
--
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