Re: 2.6.20-rc1: CIFS cheers, NFS4 jeers

[Andrew Morton]

On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 00:45:00 -0600 florin@xxxxxxxxx (Florin Iucha) wrote:

> Hello, it's me and my 70 GB of photos again.
> 
> I have tested both CIFS and NFSv4 clients in kernel 2.6.20-rc1 . CIFS
> passed with flying colors and NFSv4 stalled after 7 GB.
> 
> Configuration:
> 
>    Server: PIII/1GHz, 512 MB RAM, Debian testing,
>       distro kernel 2.6.18-3-vserver-686, Intel E1000 NIC, 
>       filesystem 170 GB ext3 with default mkfs values on a SATA disk
>       
>    Client: AMD x2 4200+, 2 GB RAM, Debian testing/unstable
>       kernel 2.6.20-rc1, Marvell SKGE onboard,
>       filesystem 120 GB ext3 with default mkfs values on a SATA disk
> 
> After the writing stalls, I have echoed 't' into /proc/sysrq-trigger
> and got a trace, which is at http://iucha.net/20-rc1/after.1.  There was
> no oops before the trace request; the 'before' dmesg is at
> http://iucha.net/20-rc1/before.1 .
> 
> Running 'top', one core is idle and the other is 99% waiting, while
> the 'cp' program is in 'D' state.  Also, after NFSv4 stalls, invokations
> of 'lsof' stall as well.  I can 'ssh' into the box without problems.

and

>
> The kernel on the client is 2.6.21-rc1 (but it echoes problems I
> reported in December with 2.6.20 series as well) as can be seen from
> the kernel logs.
> 
> I have corrected the links:
> 
>    http://iucha.net/21-rc1/before.1
>    http://iucha.net/21-rc1/after.1
>    http://iucha.net/21-rc1/config-2.6.21-rc1
> 

The relevant part is:

[ 1215.657827] cp            D 000000f86f105704     0  2859   2843                     (NOTLB)
[ 1215.657833]  ffff81007343faa8 0000000000000082 0000000000000000 ffff81007343fb58
[ 1215.657837]  0000000000000002 ffff81007343faa8 0000000000000008 ffff81007e578ee0
[ 1215.657842]  ffff810002f4a080 0000000000002150 ffff81007e5790b8 000000017343fb50
[ 1215.657847] Call Trace:
[ 1215.657852]  [<ffffffff80160f4c>] io_schedule+0x28/0x34
[ 1215.657856]  [<ffffffff80128517>] sync_page+0x41/0x45
[ 1215.657859]  [<ffffffff80161294>] __wait_on_bit+0x45/0x77
[ 1215.657862]  [<ffffffff801284d6>] sync_page+0x0/0x45
[ 1215.657867]  [<ffffffff8013370c>] wait_on_page_bit+0x6e/0x75
[ 1215.657870]  [<ffffffff801948ca>] wake_bit_function+0x0/0x2a
[ 1215.657874]  [<ffffffff801454a2>] pagevec_lookup_tag+0x22/0x2b
[ 1215.657878]  [<ffffffff80147317>] wait_on_page_writeback_range+0x6e/0x142
[ 1215.657885]  [<ffffffff801a4a79>] filemap_fdatawait+0x20/0x22
[ 1215.657889]  [<ffffffff801a4bfe>] filemap_write_and_wait+0x29/0x38
[ 1215.657894]  [<ffffffff8023019a>] nfs_setattr+0xa0/0x11a
[ 1215.657897]  [<ffffffff8010e30e>] link_path_walk+0xe8/0xfc
[ 1215.657902]  [<ffffffff80194892>] autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x38
[ 1215.657907]  [<ffffffff80112377>] poison_obj+0x27/0x32
[ 1215.657910]  [<ffffffff8010db3a>] current_fs_time+0x3f/0x41
[ 1215.657913]  [<ffffffff80122f93>] __user_walk_fd+0x53/0x62
[ 1215.657918]  [<ffffffff8012bc1b>] notify_change+0x129/0x238
[ 1215.657923]  [<ffffffff801c5ccb>] do_utimes+0xfc/0x126
[ 1215.657928]  [<ffffffff801077fc>] _raw_spin_lock+0xf3/0xf9
[ 1215.657933]  [<ffffffff801c5d3a>] sys_futimesat+0x45/0x56
[ 1215.657937]  [<ffffffff80150d3e>] sys_utimes+0x14/0x16
[ 1215.657941]  [<ffffffff8015ac5e>] system_call+0x7e/0x83

seems that we've simply lost an IO completion.

Was 2.6.19 OK?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/