xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: xfstests 013 - 2.6.35.11 - hang

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: xfstests 013 - 2.6.35.11 - hang
From: Ajeet Yadav <ajeet.yadav.77@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 12:59:11 +0530
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=1jyIgSq1FNU9IvX61wsdWjC11NgAKfPnofABi+Cyn/U=; b=BQp62eCZOJ0NP+bvAphd9gaN+MoEazMLsTxzCmqEoYUdy3hLQcGTlcQURITUXwskWA e68/0QT7fIkKSDtNBeb5TJsxM5GwO0mL5WlrXJZFmOWHCaTTUzpBrD97JluxIPshR75d HOy9eJbOlv6c1xtjcMriStuq7uI7HL7iSxlVA=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=r2t85McFzTEIC/3eMee/A/CcV3Umt9OhVfsawVGOwLgue5lQUG/QCwRdTW42ObeF2A jId9Rtpsj7z+5tVcS6xZUl1dSNvmLCI/X0Tm+rIPRTlS1OoC/ddNQfV74aKGKdX9HQug 1+cFR8MoHs5pRdkUyqReseQ/Pn+KqjAlm7saE=
In-reply-to: <20110427171107.GA29196@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <BANLkTimAXUtO=oxmLUaHLaRBnGafGP-9kg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20110427171107.GA29196@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
MIPS32® 34K™ Core
It does not provide  invalidate_kernel_vmap_range() /
flush_kernel_vmap_range() to deal with cache coherency problem
Therefore we provided dma_cache_inv() / dma_cache_wback_inv() , after
that we did not had any coherency problem
But as you saying it still has cache coherency problem, wrt xfstests 001 ?

diff -Nurp -X linux-2.6.35.11/Documentation/dontdiff
linux-2.6.35.11/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_buf.c
linux-2.6.35.11-dirty/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_buf.c
--- linux-2.6.35.11/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_buf.c  2011-02-07
04:04:07.000000000 +0900
+++ linux-2.6.35.11-dirty/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_buf.c    2011-03-22
18:29:09.000000000 +0900
@@ -1192,7 +1192,7 @@ xfs_buf_bio_end_io(
        xfs_buf_ioerror(bp, -error);

        if (!error && xfs_buf_is_vmapped(bp) && (bp->b_flags & XBF_READ))
-               invalidate_kernel_vmap_range(bp->b_addr, xfs_buf_vmap_len(bp));
+               dma_cache_inv((unsigned long)bp->b_addr, xfs_buf_vmap_len(bp));

        do {
                struct page     *page = bvec->bv_page;
@@ -1304,7 +1304,7 @@ next_chunk:
 submit_io:
        if (likely(bio->bi_size)) {
                if (xfs_buf_is_vmapped(bp)) {
-                       flush_kernel_vmap_range(bp->b_addr,
+                       dma_cache_wback_inv((unsigned long)bp->b_addr,
                                                xfs_buf_vmap_len(bp));
                }
                submit_bio(rw, bio);

On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 10:41 PM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Does 001 also fail for say ext2 and ext3?
>
>

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>