[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <502F9177.5060100@msgid.tls.msk.ru>
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2012 16:58:31 +0400
From: Michael Tokarev <mjt@....msk.ru>
To: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>
CC: "Myklebust, Trond" <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>,
"linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Subject: Re: 3.0+ NFS issues (bisected)
On 18.08.2012 15:13, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 10:49:31AM +0400, Michael Tokarev wrote:
[]
>> Well. What can I say? With the change below applied (to 3.2 kernel
>> at least), I don't see any stalls or high CPU usage on the server
>> anymore. It survived several multi-gigabyte transfers, for several
>> hours, without any problem. So it is a good step forward ;)
>>
>> But the whole thing seems to be quite a bit fragile. I tried to follow
>> the logic in there, and the thing is quite a bit, well, "twisted", and
>> somewhat difficult to follow. So I don't know if this is the right
>> fix or not. At least it works! :)
>
> Suggestions welcomed.
Ok...
Meanwhile, you can add my
Tested-By: Michael Tokarev <mjt@....msk.ru>
to the patch.
>> And I really wonder why no one else reported this problem before.
>> Is me the only one in this world who uses linux nfsd? :)
>
> This, for example:
>
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-nfs&m=134131915612287&w=2
>
> may well describe the same problem.... It just needed some debugging
> persistence, thanks!
Ah. I tried to find something when I initially
sent this report, but weren't able to. Apparently
I'm not alone with this problem indeed!
Thank you for all the work!
/mjt
--
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