On Wed, 2018-02-21 at 11:21 -0800, tj@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > Hello, Bart. > > On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 06:53:05PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote: > > On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 05:11 -0800, tj@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 04:58:56PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote: > > > > With this patch applied the tests I ran so far pass. > > > > > > Ah, great to hear. Thanks a lot for testing. Can you please verify > > > the following? It's the same approach but with RCU sync batching. > > > > Hello Tejun, > > > > After having merged kernel v4.16-rc2 into my kernel tree and after having > > applied patch "Avoid that ATA error handling hangs" > > (https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-scsi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg71145.html) I > > have not been able to reproduce the reported crash - neither with the patch > > applied that was posted on February 13th nor without that patch. This makes > > me wonder whether we should drop the discussed patches unless someone comes > > up with a reproducible test case? > > It is an actual bug in that we actually can override the timer setting > of the next request instance. Given that the race window isn't that > large, it makes sense that the reproducibility is affected by > butterflies. I think it makes sense to fix the bug. Any chance you > can test the new patch on top of the reproducible setup? Hello Tejun, Since I had not saved any of the trees that I had used during my tests I picked several trees from the "git reflog" output and tried to reproduce the crash that I had reported with these trees. Unfortunately so far without success. Bart.
