linux-kernel - Re: I/O hangs after resuming from suspend-to-ram

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:   Wed, 30 Aug 2017 12:58:21 +0200
From:   oleksandr@...alenko.name
To:     Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>
Cc:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-raid@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Shaohua Li <shli@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: I/O hangs after resuming from suspend-to-ram

Hi.

So, current summary:

1) first patch + debug patch: I can reproduce the issue in wild, but not 
with pm_test set;
2) first patch + debug patch + second patch: I cannot reproduce issue at 
all, neither with "none", nor with "mq-deadline".

Thus, "blk-mq: align to legacy path for implementing blk_execute_rq" + 
"blk-mq: add requests in the tail of hctx->dispatch" look like a proper 
fix. Thanks for that!

> I setup dm-crypt on /dev/md0 directly, could you show me how to setup 
> lvm on raid10?

If still relevant, here is a layout:

===
sda                 8:0    0    8G  0 disk
|-sda1              8:1    0  128M  0 part   /boot/EFI
`-sda2              8:2    0  7.9G  0 part
   `-md0             9:0    0  7.9G  0 raid10
     `-system-root 253:0    0  7.9G  0 lvm    /
sdb                 8:16   0    8G  0 disk
|-sdb1              8:17   0  128M  0 part
`-sdb2              8:18   0  7.9G  0 part
   `-md0             9:0    0  7.9G  0 raid10
     `-system-root 253:0    0  7.9G  0 lvm    /
===

Anything else you'd like /me to test?

30.08.2017 10:06, Ming Lei написав:
> …SNIP…
> Please try the following patch and previous patch together and see
> if they make a difference:
> …SNIP…