On Sun, Sep 04, 2016 at 08:21:17PM +0200, Marcin wrote: > W dniu 2016-09-04 02:17, Kent Overstreet napisał(a): > > Hi! > > > On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 11:29:49PM +0200, Marcin wrote: > > > Hi! > > > Kernel at commit c820493652e830dc050e1418301e1bdec5691a1e > > > > > > I createt to devices, fast has size > > > # blockdev --getsz /dev/sde1 > > > 20971520 > > > and slower device: > > > # blockdev --getsz /dev/sdd1 > > > 2930209551 > > > > > > I was copying files from one disk to bcache, after some time I got: > > > BUG: soft lockup - CPU#0 stuck for 22s! [bch_copygc_read:5328] > > > > Thanks for the report - can you run addr2line with your vmlinux file, > > and the > > RIP? > > > > addr2line -i -e vmlinux ffffffffc028795b > > It returned: > ??:0 > > Probably due to I'm using bcache as module. > <long story> > As I mentioned before I wasn't sure which branch I used to test. In case I didn't mention before - bcache-dev. This bug in the bcache-encryption branch is a bit disconcerting though since my tests never hit it, but don't worry about it - I'll chase it down. > Please look at line with "bucket size": > bucket_size: 768 > If bucket size is higher than (probably) 512 then I can't mount simple > (without tiering) bcachefs filesystem. If I use such big device in tiered > bcachefs I'm expieriencing random problems with stability of box. > I think that bug in mail's subject is only random symptom of problem when > device is formated with bucket size >512. > What is going inside kernel in this case, is overwittem memory of other > processes? Whoops - that one is a bug in bcache-tools, non power of two bucket sizes aren't supported (might be someday, but aren't currently). I just pushed a fix for that to bcache-tools. -- 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
