James Bottomley wrote: > On Sat, 2007-11-24 at 18:54 +0100, Gabriel C wrote: >> James Bottomley wrote: >>> On Sat, 2007-11-24 at 13:57 +0100, Laurent Riffard wrote: >>>> Le 24.11.2007 07:42, James Bottomley a écrit : >>>>> On Fri, 2007-11-23 at 18:52 +0100, Laurent Riffard wrote: >>>>>> Le 23.11.2007 12:38, Hannes Reinecke a écrit : >>>>>>> Hannes Reinecke wrote: >>>>>>>> Laurent Riffard wrote: >>>>>>>>> Le 21.11.2007 23:41, Andrew Morton a écrit : >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 22:45:22 +0100 >>>>>>>>>> Laurent Riffard <laurent.riffard@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Le 21.11.2007 05:45, Andrew Morton a écrit : >>>>>>>>>>>> ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.24-rc3/2.6.24-rc3-mm1/ >>>>>>>>>>> Hello, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> My system hangs shortly after I logged in Gnome desktop. SysRq-W shows >>>>>>>>>>> that a bunch of task are blocked in "D" state, they seem to wait for >>>>>>>>>>> some I/O completion. I can try to hand-copy some data if requested. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I found these messages in dmesg: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> ~$ grep -C2 end_request dmesg-2.6.24-rc3-mm1 >>>>>>>>>>> EXT3-fs: mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. >>>>>>>>>>> sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Result: hostbyte=DID_NO_CONNECT driverbyte=DRIVER_OK,SUGGEST_OK >>>>>>>>>>> end_request: I/O error, dev sda, sector 16460 >>>>>>>>>>> ReiserFS: sda7: found reiserfs format "3.6" with standard journal >>>>>>>>>>> ReiserFS: sda7: using ordered data mode >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> ReiserFS: sda7: Using r5 hash to sort names >>>>>>>>>>> sd 0:0:1:0: [sdb] Result: hostbyte=DID_NO_CONNECT driverbyte=DRIVER_OK,SUGGEST_OK >>>>>>>>>>> end_request: I/O error, dev sdb, sector 19632 >>>>>>>>>>> sd 0:0:1:0: [sdb] Result: hostbyte=DID_NO_CONNECT driverbyte=DRIVER_OK,SUGGEST_OK >>>>>>>>>>> end_request: I/O error, dev sdb, sector 40037363 >>>>>>>>>>> Adding 1048568k swap on /dev/mapper/vglinux1-lvswap. Priority:-1 extents:1 across:1048568k >>>>>>>>>>> lp0: using parport0 (interrupt-driven). >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> These errors occur *only* with 2.6.24-rc3-mm1, they are 100% reproducible. >>>>>>>>>>> 2.6.24-rc3 and 2.6.24-rc2-mm1 are fine. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Maybe something is broken in pata_via driver ? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Could be - libata-reimplement-ata_acpi_cbl_80wire-using-ata_acpi_gtm_xfermask.patch >>>>>>>>>> and pata_amd-pata_via-de-couple-programming-of-pio-mwdma-and-udma-timings.patch >>>>>>>>>> touch pata_via.c. >>>>>>>>> None of the above... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I did a bisection, it spotted git-scsi-misc.patch. >>>>>>>>> I just run 2.6.24-rc3-mm1 + revert-git-scsi-misc.patch, and it works fine. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I guess commit 8655a546c83fc43f0a73416bbd126d02de7ad6c0 "[SCSI] Do not >>>>>>>>> requeue requests if REQ_FAILFAST is set" is the real culprit. The other >>>>>>>>> commits are touching documentation or drivers I don't use. I'll try >>>>>>>>> to revert only this one this evening. >>>>>> I can confirm : reverting commit 8655a546c83fc43f0a73416bbd126d02de7ad6c0 >>>>>> does fix the problem. >>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hmm. Weird. I'll have a look into it. Apparently I'll be returning an error where >>>>>>>> I shouldn't. Checking ... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ok, found it. We are blocking even special commands (ie requests with PREEMPT not set) >>>>>>> when FAILFAST is set. Which is clearly wrong. The attached patch fixes this. >>>>>> Sorry, it's not enough. 2.6.24-rc3-mm1 + your patch still hangs with I/O errors. >>>>> I think the problem is the way we treat BLOCKED and QUIESCED (the latter >>>>> is the state that the domain validation uses and which we cannot kill >>>>> fastfail on). It's definitely wrong to kill fastfail requests when the >>>>> state is QUIESCE. >>>>> >>>>> This patch (which is applied on top of Hannes original) separates the >>>>> BLOCK and QUIESCE states correctly ... does this fix the problem? >>>> No, it doesn't help... (2.6.24-rc3-mm1 + your patch still has problems) >>> OK, could you post dmesgs again, please. I actually tested this with an >>> aic79xx card, and for me it does cause Domain Validation to succeed >>> again. >>> >> Are the patches indeed to fix that problem as well ? >> >> http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/11/23/5 > > That dmesg is from an unknown SCSI card exhibiting Domain Validation > problems, so it's a reasonable probability, yes ... but you'll need the > additional hack I just did to prevent further intermittent failures. My controller is: 03:0e.0 SCSI storage controller [0100]: Adaptec AIC-7892P U160/m [9005:008f] (rev 02) I'll try the patches in a bit. > > James > Gabriel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
