Hi Michael, On Nov 14, 2013, at 3:44 AM, Michael Conrad wrote: > Hi, using Nilfs in kernel 3.2.12, I started running into errors after about a week of steady use. On the system where this happened, it didn't behave very well; the kernel's watchdog detected a soft-lockup after 23 seconds and rebooted the system. I had it mounted with "-o errors=continue". > > I moved the drive to a different system, and mounted it (with errors=remount-ro), and read the problem files, and got I/O errors in user-land (as I might expect) but it didn't hang up the kernel or trigger a soft-lockup. > > After some reading, I now understand that errors=continue might not be the best idea. Also, the soft-lockup is detected after 20 seconds, which is maybe too narrow of a window? > > But, I wanted to post here and see if you recognized a bug that was already fixed in a newer kernel, or if it inspires ideas of how to prevent soft-lockups (by putting limits on scanning functions, or something). Also, I've decided I should at least upgrade to kernel 3.2.52, but do you know if I need to go newer than that, to avoid known bugs? > > Below is the output of "log" on the crash utility, from my vmcore. > Thank you for the issue report. But anyway I need to understand a reproducing path of the issue. Could you describe the reproducing path? I can't investigate the issue without clear understanding of the reproducing path and how stably it is possible to reproduce it. Thanks, Vyacheslav Dubeyko. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nilfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
