[lkml]   [2010]   [Apr]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
Subject2.6.34rc4 NFS writeback regression (bisected): client often fails to delete things it just created
[Trond Cc:ed as this seems to be a bug in one of your
writeback-for-2.6.34 commits.]

In 2.6.34rcX (tip of tree) I've started seeing this sort of thing when
building over NFS (v3):

-- Found LibXslt: /usr/lib64/
-- found libxml-2.0, version 2.7.6
-- Found LibXml2: /usr/lib64/
-- Found shared-mime-info version: 0.71
-- Looking for __progname
CMake Error: Remove failed on file: /usr/src/kde/x86_64-mutilate/build/CMakeFiles/CMakeTmp/CMakeFiles/cmTryCompileExec.dir/.nfs000000000031fc510000082f: System Error: Device or resource busy
[... eventually, cmake fails because of this error.]

The silly-renamed files are invariably no longer in use (they tend to be
GCC output, ELF executables run as part of testsuites) but haven't been
removed, and they -EBUSY when removal is attempted.

A complete strace log of running cmake against current HEAD (with lots
of these errors) is at
I can do a packet capture too if you like.

I also see it after doing 'make install's followed by an 'rm -rf' of the
build tree: the rm -rf fails because half the files are 'in use' (they
aren't). Repeating the rm -rf a few seconds later works. fuser, even as
root, shows no processes holding these files open.

This bisects down to

commit acdc53b2146c7ee67feb1f02f7bc3020126514b8
Author: Trond Myklebust <>
Date: Fri Feb 19 17:03:26 2010 -0800

NFS: Replace __nfs_write_mapping with sync_inode()

Now that we have correct COMMIT semantics in writeback_single_inode, we can
reduce and simplify nfs_wb_all(). Also replace nfs_wb_nocommit() with a
call to filemap_write_and_wait(), which doesn't need to hold the

With that done, we can eliminate nfs_write_mapping() altogether.

Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust <>

I suspect that unlink()ing a not otherwise open file for which writeback
is still underway is causing the files to be sillyrenamed because
writeback is holding them open. If writeback is the only user, they
should surely not be held open: nobody cares what their contents are,
and a lot of code depends on rm -r of directories containing recently-
written-but-still-closed files succeeding.

 \ /
  Last update: 2010-04-17 21:45    [W:0.063 / U:10.952 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site