On Sat, 2010-09-11 at 11:40 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote: > On Sat, 11 Sep 2010, Jon Masters wrote: > > > The code in block/blk-core:338 contains an explicit check to ensure that > > > interrupts have been disabled, but this not true since blkif_interrupt > > > is not registered with IRQF_DISABLED set at the time of the setup in > > > bind_evtchn_to_irqhandler. Thus it might be that interrupts are still on > > > when we get to kick_pending_request_queues. Does this always happen? > > > > > > This perhaps happened because upstream removed IRQF_DISABLED and now > > > runs with interrupts disabled in handle_IRQ_event, so Xen won't see > > > this. But on 2.6.32 this change had not yet happened. It's also 2:50am > > > and I might be reading this wrong, but I at least suggest you open a > > > RHEL6 bug and try a more recent kernel build. > > Ah, of course I shouldn't email before bed. There's an obvious giant > > spin_lock_irqsave/restore there, but as noted on xen-devel (when they > > were mulling over moving all of the blkif_interrupt bits into a tasklet > > jut a couple of weeks ago): "It looks like __blk_end_request_all...is > > returning with interrupts enabled sometimes". I pinged some folks. > Just so everyone else knows, I've set kernel.panic to 10 on these hosts so > at least they'll reboot when they panic. Hopefully we can avoid a few > wake-and-reboot issues like we had last night :-/ I pinged some folks about it last night. I would hope there will be a fix for that soon. I suspect it's reproducible on the 70+ kernels, but can you check that for us and update the BZ? Jon. _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
