> On Dec 22, 2022, at 8:30 AM, Mike Galbraith <efault@xxxxxx> wrote: > > Quoting previous mail for context. > > On Thu, 2022-12-22 at 05:14 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote: >> On Thu, 2022-12-22 at 04:42 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote: >>> On Wed, 2022-12-21 at 10:56 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote: >>>>> 6.1 didn't reproduce either, so it would appear to be a merge window bug. >>> >>> Ah, not true, turning evolution loose in nfs mounted home and letting >>> it refresh mailboxes while desktop box was kept busy jammed up 6.1.0 in >>> fairly short order. >> >> Well crap. That was _not_ virgin 6.1.0 after all, it was 6.1.0 with... >> >> 44df6f439a17 NFSD: add delegation reaper to react to low memory condition >> 3959066b697b NFSD: add support for sending CB_RECALL_ANY >> a1049eb47f20 NFSD: refactoring courtesy_client_reaper to a generic low memory shrinker >> >> ...applied from poking about yesterday. I had given up on those as >> culprit, and intended to pop them off and rebuild, but they were in >> fact in the booted kernel. Oh well, booboo could have a bright side. > > I let my desktop box play server/space-heater for a long test session > of 6.1 with and without the above series: with, box bricked 3 times in > ~5 hours, without, 0 bricks in ~6 hours. Box says woof -> duck ;-) Thank you for testing! > Given the similarity you mentioned, I wonder if my bug is perhaps your > sneaky bug rendered somewhat less sneaky by that series? One can hope. Not likely: we've seen problems since 5.19, and these patches were merged in 6.2-rc. So my question is whether you see a problem when only a1049eb47f20 is applied, or only when all three are applied? -- Chuck Lever
