Don Zickus <dzickus@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 02:29:56PM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote: >> Don Zickus <dzickus@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> > On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 06:59:12PM +0200, Antonio Trande wrote: >> >> The digital picture are here: >> >> http://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/kernel-boot.tar.gz >> > >> > According to our DM guys this fix just missed 3.1 >> > >> > http://git.kernel.dk/?p=linux-block.git;a=commit;h=f26d8f0562da76731cb049943a0e9d9fa81d946a >> > http://git.kernel.dk/?p=linux-block.git;a=commit;h=8f02b3a09b1b7d2a4d24b8cd7008f2a441f19a14 >> > >> > I cc'd Jeff Moyer he knows about it. The DM folks assume that you are >> > using multipath (as that is the only way you can hit this bug from their >> > point of view). >> >> This doesn't look like the same problem. Here we've got BUG: scheduling >> while atomic. If it was the bug fixed by the above commits, then you >> would hit a BUG_ON. I would start looking at the btrfs bits to see if >> they're holding any locks in this code path. > > Ignore that one and move to IMG_0350.IMG. 'scheduling while atomic' is > just noise. Besides Mike and Vivek told me to blame you for not pushing > Jens harder on these fixes. :-))))) I'm looking at 0355, which shows the very top of the trace, and that says BUG: scheduling while atomic. So the problem reported here *is* different from the one fixed by the above two commits. In fact, I don't see evidence of the multipath + flush issue in any of these pictures. Cheers, Jeff _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel
