* James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 17:08 +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote: > > On Tuesday 2009-03-03 16:21, James Bottomley wrote: > > >> > $ slabtop > > >> > OBJS ACTIVE USE OBJ SIZE SLABS OBJ/SLAB CACHE SIZE NAME > > >> > 818616 818616 100% 0.16K 34109 24 136436K sgpool-8 > > >> > 253692 253692 100% 0.62K 42282 6 169128K sgpool-32 > > >> > 52017 52016 99% 2.50K 17339 3 138712K sgpool-128 > > >> > 26220 26219 99% 0.31K 2185 12 8740K sgpool-16 > > >> > 8927 8574 96% 0.03K 79 113 316K size-32 > > >> > > >> Looks like a leak, by failing to call scsi_release_buffers() > > >> somehow. (Which was changed recently) > > > > > >Firstly, I have to say I don't see this in the mainline tree, so could > > >you try that with your setup just to verify (git head at 2.6.29-rc6). > > > > Yes, looking at the rt patch (in broken-out it's in origin.diff), > > it seems a bit obvious - the scsi_release_buffers is not called anymore: > > OK, this is a bad patch, so just revert it. It was posted to > linux-scsi initially in this form before the author posted a > new one with the missing release buffers added. It looks like > the first incarnation got pulled into the -rt tree for some > reasons. Uhm. I applied a test-patch from Alan Stern, to possibly fix an SCSI lockup with aic7xxx that _I_ reported to you and then to the scsi-list. You were Cc:-ed to that test patch and to my bugreport as well, all the way. Do you claim that you dont remember it? The saga is still documented in tip:out-of-tree (which is a special branch with out-of-tree hotfixes): 7e4cbd1: fix "scsi: aic7xxx hang since v2.6.28-rc1" e027abc: scsi: temporarily undo scsi reverts 813104e: Revert "[SCSI] simplify scsi_io_completion()" 84db545: Revert "[SCSI] Fix uninitialized variable error in scsi_io_completion" 0eb6038: Revert "[SCSI] Fix error handling for DIF/DIX" 3cd94dd: Revert "[SCSI] scsi_lib: don't decrement busy counters when inserting commands" c27aed5: Revert "[SCSI] scsi_lib: fix DID_RESET status problems" I wasnt Cc:-ed on the updated patch AFAICS, so i didnt pick it up. > So the real question is why does the -rt tree even have > patches not in the vanilla SCSI tree? This type of cockup > clearly demonstrates why it's a bad idea. Believe me, i have better things to do than to track down your regressions. I applied a fix/test patch sent to me by SCSI folks. Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
