Date: Mon, 28 May 2018 09:02:01 +0200 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@leidinger.net> To: Slawa Olhovchenkov <slw@zxy.spb.ru> Cc: Kirill Ponomarev <kp@krion.cc>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Deadlocks / hangs in ZFS Message-ID: <20180528090201.Horde._E4JZcuEaZHfj_BNzWjci2O@webmail.leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <20180527220612.GK1926@zxy.spb.ru> References: <20180522101749.Horde.Wxz9gSxx1xArxkYMQqTL0iZ@webmail.leidinger.net> <fa263af4-9bf7-88f8-8d23-21456daf7960@FreeBSD.org> <20180522122924.GC1954@zxy.spb.ru> <20180522161632.Horde.ROSnBoZixBoE9ZBGp5VBQgZ@webmail.leidinger.net> <20180522144055.GD1954@zxy.spb.ru> <20180527194159.v54ox3vlthpuvx4q@jo> <20180527220612.GK1926@zxy.spb.ru>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --] Quoting Slawa Olhovchenkov <slw@zxy.spb.ru> (from Mon, 28 May 2018 01:06:12 +0300): > On Sun, May 27, 2018 at 09:41:59PM +0200, Kirill Ponomarev wrote: > >> On 05/22, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: >> > > It has been a while since I tried Karl's patch the last time, and I >> > > stopped because it didn't apply to -current anymore at some point. >> > > Will what is provided right now in the patch work on -current? >> > >> > I am mean yes, after s/vm_cnt.v_free_count/vm_free_count()/g >> > I am don't know how to have two distinct patch (for stable and >> current) in one review. >> >> I'm experiencing these issues sporadically as well, would you mind >> to publish this patch for fresh current? > > Week ago I am adopt and publish patch to fresh current and stable, is > adopt need again? I applied the patch in the review yesterday to rev 333966, it applied OK (with some fuzz). I will try to reproduce my issue with the patch. Some thoughts I had after looking a little bit at the output of top... half of the RAM of my machine is in use, the other half is listed as free. Swap gets used while there is plenty of free RAM. I have NUMA in my kernel (it's 2 socket Xeon system). I don't see any NUMA specific code in the diff (and I don't expect something there), but could it be that some NUMA related behavior comes into play here too? Does it make sense to try without NUMA in the kernel? Bye, Alexander. -- http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander@Leidinger.net: PGP 0x8F31830F9F2772BF http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild@FreeBSD.org : PGP 0x8F31830F9F2772BF [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAABAgAGBQJbC6lpAAoJEKrxQhqFIICEanUP/0kmlwJK0yfZqwtb94EfBjYZ k9i5c9Ht1MNKdum/M+YfsIsQFZ0g5ilacZMtue0po0qNXQIR27MTp+WqUygPb3kk 3w+JgE2gi75b37s/1X+agOUPqGpIYOsLSpvFAxCNsy45aPNJTY22r+s8si1qrKY9 zjV48YF3jsEUxeXQ5augg77bdKq+Al8ltgVzdxLDwHLq6lNtmrV4f9m+/k356nya s5jyKSB2edH+vfBRKsu40R6Mgnb7wiAo8PUN5lmAoH2tYiWcg0aGfKgceRlNXAWG o0iNw8hQaBQQSwc8GuY0oczDY1i121YOUJr3NqpK4bB6vhh2hwNkwRijX5Iii2Cf 658aq/gNf//oTLv1t6fItTyr0MAjO4W4YVOBvsJxs9vmkaisqMLWb9hdHBgwaxEl jbfmgtYsx6AhCBnUtSufYONbjCudLGZsg2XSDPSTfib5HDSWV0JcYpuSCnJ0A3zq VwYisnGP3R9NBhMfblaqjkaYSPj1iJuYAeRVtzyQS7eU6IPlRYhVJkuU6Ubkbhwu +opiC4B6xhPPCWOkZPRupJ/QiIU48oKT3IKcPXdbpYkd4LIeh0my3kb6BfpNPS/r FpBHV3oYpKl9SN4PJOivfob94bUxujSAcr6kK/BoNFmX43eVajYXPiOstxAIJ6R6 KuSSa57940QkwNBsDEUz =kzV7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20180528090201.Horde._E4JZcuEaZHfj_BNzWjci2O>