linux-kernel - Re: scsi-mq V2

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 10 Jul 2014 15:14:29 -0400
From:	Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
To:	"Elliott\, Robert \(Server Storage\)" <Elliott@...com>
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
	"dgilbert\@interlog.com" <dgilbert@...erlog.com>,
	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
	Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@...ionio.com>,
	Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@...ck.org>,
	"linux-scsi\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: scsi-mq V2

"Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)" <Elliott@...com> writes:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Christoph Hellwig [mailto:hch@...radead.org]
>> Sent: Thursday, 10 July, 2014 11:15 AM
>> To: Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)
>> Cc: Jens Axboe; dgilbert@...erlog.com; James Bottomley; Bart Van Assche;
>> Benjamin LaHaise; linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
>> Subject: Re: scsi-mq V2
>> 
>> On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 09:04:22AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> > It's starting to look weird.  I'll prepare another two bisect branches
>> > around some MM changes, which seems the only other possible candidate.
>> 
>> I've pushed out scsi-mq.3-bisect-3 
>
> Good.
>
>> and scsi-mq.3-bisect-4 for you.
>
> Bad.
>
> Note: I had to apply the vdso2c.h patch to build this -rc3 based kernel:
> diff --git a/arch/x86/vdso/vdso2c.h b/arch/x86/vdso/vdso2c.h
> index df95a2f..11b65d4 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/vdso/vdso2c.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/vdso/vdso2c.h
> @@ -93,6 +93,9 @@ static void BITSFUNC(copy_section)(struct BITSFUNC(fake_sections) *out,
> 	uint64_t flags = GET_LE(&in->sh_flags);
>
> 	bool copy = flags & SHF_ALLOC &&
> +		(GET_LE(&in->sh_size) ||
> +		(GET_LE(&in->sh_type) != SHT_RELA &&
> +		GET_LE(&in->sh_type) != SHT_REL)) &&
> 		strcmp(name, ".altinstructions") &&
> 		strcmp(name, ".altinstr_replacement");
>
> Results: fio started OK, getting 900K IOPS, but ^C led to 0 IOPS and
> an fio hang, with one CPU (CPU 0) stuck in io_submit loops.

Hi, Rob,

Can you get sysrq-t output for me?  I don't know how/why we'd continue
to get io_submits for an exiting process.

Thanks,
Jeff
--
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/