On Friday May 26, dean@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> On Tue, 23 May 2006, Neil Brown wrote:
>
> i applied them against 2.6.16.18 and two days later i got my first hang...
> below is the stripe_cache foo.
>
> thanks
> -dean
>
> neemlark:~# cd /sys/block/md4/md/
> neemlark:/sys/block/md4/md# cat stripe_cache_active
> 255
> 0 preread
> bitlist=0 delaylist=255
> neemlark:/sys/block/md4/md# cat stripe_cache_active
> 255
> 0 preread
> bitlist=0 delaylist=255
> neemlark:/sys/block/md4/md# cat stripe_cache_active
> 255
> 0 preread
> bitlist=0 delaylist=255
Thanks. This narrows it down quite a bit... too much infact: I can
now say for sure that this cannot possible happen :-)
Two things that might be helpful:
1/ Do you have any other patches on 2.6.16.18 other than the 3 I
sent you? If you do I'd like to see them, just in case.
2/ The message.gz you sent earlier with the
echo t > /proc/sysrq-trigger
trace in it didn't contain information about md4_raid5 - the
controlling thread for that array. It must have missed out
due to a buffer overflowing. Next time it happens, could you
to get this trace again and see if you can find out what
what md4_raid5 is going. Maybe do the 'echo t' several times.
I think that you need a kernel recompile to make the dmesg
buffer larger.
Thanks for your patience - this must be very frustrating for you.
NeilBrown
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
