lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jan]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/5] NFS: create blocklayout pipe per network namesapce context
11.01.2012 20:23, Trond Myklebust пишет:
> On Tue, 2012-01-10 at 16:58 +0400, Stanislav Kinsbursky wrote:
>> 06.01.2012 00:58, Trond Myklebust пишет:
>>> The second problem that was highlighted was the fact that as they stand
>>> today, these patchsets do not allow for bisection. When we hit the Oops,
>>> I had Bryan try to bisect where the problem arose. He ended up pointing
>>> at the patch "SUNRPC: handle RPC client pipefs dentries by network
>>> namespace aware routine", which is indeed the cause, but which is one of
>>> the _dependencies_ for all the PipeFS notifier patches that fix the
>>> problem.
>>>
>>
>> I'm confused here. Does this means, that I have to fix patch "SUNRPC: handle RPC
>> client pipefs dentries by network namespace aware routine" to make it able to
>> bisect?
>
> What I mean is that currently, I have various ways to Oops the kernel
> when I apply "SUNRPC: handle RPC client pipefs dentries by network
> namespace aware routine" before all these other followup patches are
> applied.
>
> One way to could fix this, might be to add dummy versions of
> rpc_pipefs_notifier_register()/unregister() so that "NFS: idmap PipeFS
> notifier introduced" and the other such patches can be applied without
> compilation errors or Oopses before the "handle RPC client pipefs
> dentries..." patch is applied. The latter could then enable the real
> rpc_pipefs_notifier_register()/....
>
> The point is to not have these patches add _known_ bugs to the kernel at
> any point, so that someone who is trying to track down an unknown bug
> via "git bisect" doesn't have to also cope with these avoidable
> issues...
>

Ok, thanks for explanation.
I've sent rebased "v2" of the patch set, contains updated patch "SUNRPC: handle
RPC client pipefs dentries by network namespace aware routine", which, I
believe, fixes oops, spotted by Bryan (it was caused by excessive call of
rpc_put_mount() on PipeFS dentries unlink).
So, if I'm not mistaken here, there's no need in implementing of dummy versions
of rpc_pipefs_notifier_(un)register() or any other dummy stuff.

BTW, it looks like that in last 2 days I've sent all updates to the issues you
pointed out. If not, please, ping me once more.

--
Best regards,
Stanislav Kinsbursky
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-01-11 18:25    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site