On 06/26/2016 02:16 PM, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > On 02.06.2016 15:29, Daniel Wagner wrote: >>> Hmmm, Ok. I've been running the lockperf test and kernel builds all >>> day on a filesystem that is identical in shape and size to yours >>> (i.e. xfs_info output is the same) but I haven't reproduced it yet. >> I don't know if that is important: I run the lockperf test and after >> they have finished I do a kernel build. >> >>> Is it possible to get a metadump image of your filesystem to see if >>> I can reproduce it on that? >> Sure, see private mail. > > Dave, Daniel, what's the latest status on this issue? I had no time to do some more testing in last couple of weeks. Tomorrow I'll try to reproduce it again, though last time I tried it couldn't trigger it. > It made it to my > list of know 4.7 regressions after Christoph suggested it should be > listed. But this thread looks stalled, as afaics nothing happened for > three weeks apart from Josh (added to CC) mentioning he also saw it. Or > is this discussed elsewhere? Or fixed already? The discussion wandered over to the thread called 'crash in xfs in current' and there are some instruction by Al what to do test Message-ID: <20160622014253.GS12670@dastard> cheers, daniel _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
