Re: qla2xxx BUG: workqueue leaked lock or atomic

[Andre Noll]

On 12:05, Mingming Cao wrote:
> > > BTW: Are ext3 filesystem sizes greater than 8T now officially
> > > supported?
> > 
> > I think so, but I don't know how much 16TB testing developers and
> > distros are doing - perhaps the linux-ext4 denizens can tell us?
> > -
> 
> IBM has done some testing (dbench, fsstress, fsx, tiobench, iozone etc)
> on 10TB ext3, I think RedHat and BULL have done similar test on >8TB
> ext3 too.

Thanks. I'm asking because some days ago I tried to create a 10T ext3
filesytem on a linear software raid over two hardware raids, and it
failed horribly. mke2fs from e2fsprogs-1.39 refused to create such a
large filesystem but did it with -F, and I could mount it afterwards.
But writing data immediately produced zillions of errors and only
power-cycling the box helped.

We're now using a 7.9T filesystem on the same hardware. That seems
to work fine on 2.6.21-rc2, so I think this is an ext3 problem. I
cannot completely rule out other reasons though as the underlying
qla2xxx driver also had some problems on earlier kernels.

We'd much rather have a 10T filesystem if possible. So if you have
time to look into the issue I would be willing to recreate the 10T
filesystem and send details.

Regards
Andre
-- 
The only person who always got his work done by Friday was Robinson Crusoe

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature