Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1580583

RE: Boot regression (was "Re: [PATCH] genhd: Do not hold event lock when scheduling workqueue elements")

From Dexuan Cui <decui@microsoft.com>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject RE: Boot regression (was "Re: [PATCH] genhd: Do not hold event lock when scheduling workqueue elements")
Date 2017-02-14 15:50 +0100
Message-ID <taMAy-35w-21@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References (6 earlier) <t8X76-6JS-83@gated-at.bofh.it> <t9kQ3-4Jf-33@gated-at.bofh.it> <taLEt-2wc-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <taM7v-2Vs-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <taMqS-320-29@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

> From: hch@lst.de [mailto:hch@lst.de]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2017 22:29
> To: Dexuan Cui <decui@microsoft.com>
> Subject: Re: Boot regression (was "Re: [PATCH] genhd: Do not hold event lock
> when scheduling workqueue elements")
> 
> Ok, thanks for testing.  Can you try the patch below?  It fixes a
> clear problem which was partially papered over before the commit
> you bisected to, although it can't explain why blk-mq still works.

Still bad luck. :-(

BTW, I'm using the first "bad" commit (scsi: allocate scsi_cmnd structures as
part of struct request) + the 2 patches you provided today.

I suppose I don't need to test the 2 patches on the latest linux-next repo.

Thanks,
-- Dexuan

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Boot regression (was "Re: [PATCH] genhd: Do not hold event         lock when scheduling workqueue elements") "hch@lst.de" <hch@lst.de> - 2017-02-14 14:50 +0100
  Re: Boot regression (was "Re: [PATCH] genhd: Do not hold event         lock when scheduling workqueue elements") "hch@lst.de" <hch@lst.de> - 2017-02-14 15:40 +0100
    RE: Boot regression (was "Re: [PATCH] genhd: Do not hold event lock  when scheduling workqueue elements") Dexuan Cui <decui@microsoft.com> - 2017-02-14 15:50 +0100
      Re: Boot regression (was "Re: [PATCH] genhd: Do not hold event         lock when scheduling workqueue elements") "hch@lst.de" <hch@lst.de> - 2017-02-14 16:00 +0100
        Re: Boot regression (was "Re: [PATCH] genhd: Do not hold event         lock when scheduling workqueue elements") "hch@lst.de" <hch@lst.de> - 2017-02-14 17:40 +0100
          RE: Boot regression (was "Re: [PATCH] genhd: Do not hold event lock  when scheduling workqueue elements") Dexuan Cui <decui@microsoft.com> - 2017-02-15 15:00 +0100

csiph-web