Re: Unresponiveness of 2.4.16

[Andrew Morton]

Torrey Hoffman wrote:
> 
> Hmm. Speaking of dbench, I tried the combination of 2.4.16,
> your 2.4.16 low latency patch, and the IO scheduling patch
> on my dual PIII.
> 
> After starting it up I did a dbench 32 on a 180 GB reiserfs
> running on software RAID 5, just to see if it would
> fall over, and during the run I got the following error/
> warning message printed about 20 times on the console
> and in the kernel log:
> 
> vs-4150: reiserfs_new_blocknrs, block not free<4>
> 

uh-oh.  I probably broke reiserfs in the low-latency patch.

It's fairly harmless - we drop the big kernel lock, schedule
away.  Upon resumption, the block we had decided to allocate
has been allocated by someone else.  The filesystem emits a
warning and goes off to find a different block.

Will fix.

-