io_schedule_timeout(5*HZ); Introduced for avoidance dm bug: http://linux.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/Kernel/2006-08/msg04869.html According to description must be replaced with io_schedule() Can you test it and answer: it produce any regression? I replace it and recompile kernel, tested it by following script: --- dev="" block_dev=zram #loop if [ "$block_dev" == "loop" ]; then f1=$RANDOM f2=${f1}_2 truncate -s 256G ./$f1 truncate -s 256G ./$f2 dev="$(losetup -f --show ./$f1) $(losetup -f --show ./$f2)" rm ./$f1 ./$f2 else modprobe zram num_devices=8 # needed ~1g free ram for test echo 128G > /sys/block/zram7/disksize echo 128G > /sys/block/zram6/disksize dev="/dev/zram7 /dev/zram6" fi md=/dev/md$[$RANDOM%8] echo "y\n" | mdadm --create $md --chunk=4 --level=1 --raid-devices=2 $(echo $dev) [ "$block_dev" == "loop" ] && losetup -d $(echo $dev) & mkfs.xfs -f $md mount $md /mnt cat /dev/zero > /mnt/$RANDOM & cat /dev/zero > /mnt/$RANDOM & wait umount -l /mnt mdadm --stop $md if [ "$block_dev" == "zram" ]; then echo 1 > /sys/block/zram7/reset echo 1 > /sys/block/zram6/reset fi --- i.e. i can't get this error for fast test with zram and slow test with loop devices Signed-off-by: Timofey Titovets <nefelim4ag@xxxxxxxxx> --- mm/mempool.c | 6 +----- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/mm/mempool.c b/mm/mempool.c index e209c98..ae230c9 100644 --- a/mm/mempool.c +++ b/mm/mempool.c @@ -253,11 +253,7 @@ repeat_alloc: spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pool->lock, flags); - /* - * FIXME: this should be io_schedule(). The timeout is there as a - * workaround for some DM problems in 2.6.18. - */ - io_schedule_timeout(5*HZ); + io_schedule(); finish_wait(&pool->wait, &wait); goto repeat_alloc; -- 2.1.3 -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
