From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752083AbdBTDCx (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 Feb 2017 22:02:53 -0500 Received: from mail-pf0-f169.google.com ([209.85.192.169]:32967 "EHLO mail-pf0-f169.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751926AbdBTDCv (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 Feb 2017 22:02:51 -0500 Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Block pull request for- 4.11-rc1 To: James Bottomley , Bart Van Assche , Linus Torvalds References: <1D08B61A9CF0974AA09887BE32D889DA0A74F3@ULS-OP-MBXIP03.sdcorp.global.sandisk.com> <633d226d-cec3-a01f-a069-ffff307e9715@kernel.dk> <1487556740.2244.15.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <75b9d9d8-9395-c7af-b29d-f016e9921498@kernel.dk> Cc: "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Christoph Hellwig , Mike Snitzer From: Jens Axboe Message-ID: Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2017 20:02:26 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <75b9d9d8-9395-c7af-b29d-f016e9921498@kernel.dk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 02/19/2017 07:59 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 02/19/2017 07:12 PM, James Bottomley wrote: >> On Sun, 2017-02-19 at 18:15 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: >>> On 02/19/2017 06:09 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: >>>> On 02/19/2017 04:11 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>>> - Removal of the BLOCK_PC support in struct request, and >>>>> refactoring of >>>>> carrying SCSI payloads in the block layer. This cleans up the >>>>> code >>>>> nicely, and enables us to kill the SCSI specific parts of >>>>> struct >>>>> request, shrinking it down nicely. From Christoph mainly, with >>>>> help >>>>> from Hannes. >>>> >>>> Hello Jens, Christoph and Mike, >>>> >>>> Is anyone working on a fix for the regression introduced by the >>>> BLOCK_PC removal changes (general protection fault) that I had >>>> reported three weeks ago? See also >>>> https://www.spinics.net/lists/raid/msg55494.html >>> >>> I don't think that's a regression in this series, it just triggers >>> more easily with this series. The BLOCK_PC removal fixes aren't >>> touching device life times at all. >>> >>> That said, we will look into this again, of course. Christoph, any >>> idea? >> >> We could do with tracing the bdi removal failure issue fingered both by >> the block xfstests and Omar. It's something to do with this set of >> commits >> >>> - Fixes for duplicate bdi registrations and bdi/queue life time >>> problems from Jan and Dan. >> >> But no-one has actually root caused it yet. > > The above set from Jan and Dan fixed one set of issues around this, and > the reproducer test case was happy as well. But we've recently found > that there are still corner cases that aren't happy, Omar reported that > separately on Friday. So there will be a followup set for that, > hopefully intersecting with the issue that Bart reported. Forgot to mention, that these cases exist in 4.0 and 4.6 as well, so neither are a new problem with this series. The fixes from Jan and Dan didn't close all of them. -- Jens Axboe