at least i'm suffering from two problems on 3.10:
1.) dirty value is often wrong / can go negative
2.) writeback cache is only cleared / written back when having
writeback_percent => 0
The first one is already fixed by kent - just waiting for a backport.
Greets,
Stefan
Am 09.11.2013 07:47, schrieb Kent Overstreet:
On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 07:01:28PM -0800, Paul B. Henson wrote:
I'd kinda like to use the 3.10 LTS kernel for a virtualization server
I'm building, but it seems like every time somebody reports a problem
the recommendation is to make sure you're using the latest bleeding edge
kernel. Is it intended for bcache to be considered production ready in
the 3.10 LTS branch, or do you pretty much have to run the latest stable
of the week for now if you want to be sure to get all the bcache bugfixes
necessary for a stable system? Specifically, I'd like to use a raid1 of 2
256G SSDs to be a write-back cache for a raid10 of 4 2TB HDs. Occasional
reboots aren't an issue for kernel updates, but I'd prefer to avoid the
potential instability and config churn of tracking the mainline kernel.
Yes - 3.10 LTS (or 3.11) has been what you want to be running for awhile
now; I've been making sure all the bugfixes get backported quickly. The
only bugfix I know of that I wasn't backported was a fix for a suspend
issue, because it was part of a fairly involved allocator rework.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-bcache" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-bcache" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
