diff for duplicates of <1125086079.5019070.1369285040855.JavaMail.root@redhat.com>

diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt
index 3749ca8..c7911cb 100644
--- a/a/1.txt
+++ b/N1/1.txt
@@ -2,17 +2,18 @@ Original report:
 http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2013-05/msg00683.html
 
 Also seen on Power7:
-http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=136927904900692&w=2
+http://marc.info/?l=3Dlinux-kernel&m=3D136927904900692&w=3D2
 
 CAI Qian
 
 ----- Original Message -----
 > From: "Dave Chinner" <david@fromorbit.com>
 > To: "CAI Qian" <caiqian@redhat.com>
-> Cc: "LKML" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, stable@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com
+> Cc: "LKML" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, stable@vger.kernel.org, xfs@os=
+s.sgi.com
 > Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 11:46:11 AM
 > Subject: Re: 3.9.2: xfstests triggered panic
-> 
+>=20
 > On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 11:16:56PM -0400, CAI Qian wrote:
 > > ----- Original Message -----
 > > > From: "Dave Chinner" <david@fromorbit.com>
@@ -21,101 +22,108 @@ CAI Qian
 > > > xfs@oss.sgi.com
 > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 5:53:00 PM
 > > > Subject: Re: 3.9.2: xfstests triggered panic
-> > > 
+> > >=20
 > > > On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 04:39:58AM -0400, CAI Qian wrote:
 > > > > Reproduced on almost all s390x guests by running xfstests.
-> > > > 
-> > > > 14634.396658¨ XFS (dm-1): Mounting Filesystem
-> > > > 14634.525522¨ XFS (dm-1): Ending clean mount
-> > > > 14640.413007¨  <000000000017c6d4>¨ idle_balance+0x1a0/0x340
-> > > > 14640.413010¨  <000000000063303e>¨ __schedule+0xa22/0xaf0
-> > > > 14640.428279¨  <0000000000630da6>¨ schedule_timeout+0x186/0x2c0
-> > > > 14640.428289¨  <00000000001cf864>¨ rcu_gp_kthread+0x1bc/0x298
-> > > > 14640.428300¨  <0000000000158c5a>¨ kthread+0xe6/0xec
-> > > > 14640.428304¨  <0000000000634de6>¨ kernel_thread_starter+0x6/0xc
-> > > > 14640.428308¨  <0000000000634de0>¨ kernel_thread_starter+0x0/0xc
-> > > > 14640.428311¨ Last Breaking-Event-Address:
-> > > > 14640.428314¨  <000000000016bd76>¨ walk_tg_tree_from+0x3a/0xf4
-> > > > 14640.428319¨  list_add corruption. next->prev should be prev
+> > > >=20
+> > > > 14634.396658=C2=A8 XFS (dm-1): Mounting Filesystem
+> > > > 14634.525522=C2=A8 XFS (dm-1): Ending clean mount
+> > > > 14640.413007=C2=A8  <000000000017c6d4>=C2=A8 idle_balance+0x1a0/0x3=
+40
+> > > > 14640.413010=C2=A8  <000000000063303e>=C2=A8 __schedule+0xa22/0xaf0
+> > > > 14640.428279=C2=A8  <0000000000630da6>=C2=A8 schedule_timeout+0x186=
+/0x2c0
+> > > > 14640.428289=C2=A8  <00000000001cf864>=C2=A8 rcu_gp_kthread+0x1bc/0=
+x298
+> > > > 14640.428300=C2=A8  <0000000000158c5a>=C2=A8 kthread+0xe6/0xec
+> > > > 14640.428304=C2=A8  <0000000000634de6>=C2=A8 kernel_thread_starter+=
+0x6/0xc
+> > > > 14640.428308=C2=A8  <0000000000634de0>=C2=A8 kernel_thread_starter+=
+0x0/0xc
+> > > > 14640.428311=C2=A8 Last Breaking-Event-Address:
+> > > > 14640.428314=C2=A8  <000000000016bd76>=C2=A8 walk_tg_tree_from+0x3a=
+/0xf4
+> > > > 14640.428319=C2=A8  list_add corruption. next->prev should be prev
 > > > > (0000000000000918
-> > > > ), but was           (null). (next=          (null)).
-> > > 
+> > > > ), but was           (null). (next=3D          (null)).
+> > >=20
 > > > Where's XFS in this? walk_tg_tree_from() is part of the scheduler
 > > > code. This kind of implies a stack corruption....
-> > > 
+> > >=20
 > > > > Sometimes, this pops up,
 > > > > [16907.275002] WARNING: at kernel/rcutree.c:1960
-> > > > 
+> > > >=20
 > > > > or this,
-> > > > 15316.154171¨ XFS (dm-1): Mounting Filesystem
-> > > > 15316.255796¨ XFS (dm-1): Ending clean mount
-> > > > 15320.364246¨            00000000006367a2: e310b0080004        lg
+> > > > 15316.154171=C2=A8 XFS (dm-1): Mounting Filesystem
+> > > > 15316.255796=C2=A8 XFS (dm-1): Ending clean mount
+> > > > 15320.364246=C2=A8            00000000006367a2: e310b0080004       =
+ lg
 > > > > %r1,8(%r
 > > > > 11)
-> > > > 15320.364249¨            00000000006367a8: 41101010            la
+> > > > 15320.364249=C2=A8            00000000006367a8: 41101010           =
+ la
 > > > > %r1,16(%
 > > > > r1)
-> > > > 15320.364251¨            00000000006367ac: e33010000004        lg
+> > > > 15320.364251=C2=A8            00000000006367ac: e33010000004       =
+ lg
 > > > > %r3,0(%r
 > > > > 1)
-> > > > 15320.364252¨ Call Trace:
-> > > > 15320.364252¨ Last Breaking-Event-Address:
-> > > > 15320.364253¨  � <0000000000000000>¨ Kernel stack overflow.
-> > > > 15320.364308¨ CPU: 0 Tainted: GF       W    3.9.2 #1
-> > > > 15320.364309¨ Process rhts-test-runne (pid: 625, task:
+> > > > 15320.364252=C2=A8 Call Trace:
+> > > > 15320.364252=C2=A8 Last Breaking-Event-Address:
+> > > > 15320.364253=C2=A8  =EF=BF=BD <0000000000000000>=C2=A8 Kernel stack=
+ overflow.
+> > > > 15320.364308=C2=A8 CPU: 0 Tainted: GF       W    3.9.2 #1
+> > > > 15320.364309=C2=A8 Process rhts-test-runne (pid: 625, task:
 > > > > 000000003dccc890,
 > > > > ksp: 0
-> > > 
+> > >=20
 > > > .... and there you go - a stack overflow. Your kernel stack size is
 > > > too small.
-> > > 
+> > >=20
 > > > I'd suggest that you need 16k stacks on s390 - IIRC every function
 > > > call has 128 byte stack frame, and there are call chains 70-80
 > > > functions deep in the storage stack...
 > > Hmm, I am unsure how to set to 16k stack there
-> 
+>=20
 > Are you build a 64 bit s390 kernel or a 32 bit kernel? 32 bit
 > kernels only have an 8k stack size, 64 bit kernels are 16k (see
 > arch/s390/Makefile).
-> 
+>=20
 > $ git grep STACK_SIZE arch/s390 |head -2
-> arch/s390/Makefile:STACK_SIZE   := 8192
-> arch/s390/Makefile:STACK_SIZE   := 16384
-> 
+> arch/s390/Makefile:STACK_SIZE   :=3D 8192
+> arch/s390/Makefile:STACK_SIZE   :=3D 16384
+>=20
 > As it is, the stack frame usage is worse than I thought:
-> 
+>=20
 > $ git grep STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD arch/s390 |head -2
-> arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/ptrace.h:#define STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD 96      /*
+> arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/ptrace.h:#define STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD 96      =
+/*
 > size of minimum stack frame */
-> arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/ptrace.h:#define STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD 160      /*
+> arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/ptrace.h:#define STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD 160     =
+ /*
 > size of minimum stack frame */
-> 
+>=20
 > Overhead is 96 bytes for 32 bit and 160 bytes for 64 bit. So 16k
 > stack size is going to have big troubles with a 70-80 function deep
 > call chain.
-> 
+>=20
 > As for powerpc:
-> 
+>=20
 > arch/powerpc/include/asm/ppc_asm.h:#define STACKFRAMESIZE 256
-> 
+>=20
 > Yeah, same issue.
-> 
+>=20
 > But, seriously, these stack traces are meaningless to anyone not
 > familiar with s390 or power7 - they indicate a problem detected
 > in the idle loop, not where ever the stack overran.
-> 
+>=20
 > Can you please work with the s390/power7 people to obtain whatever
 > stack it was that overflowed, and we can go from there.
-> 
+>=20
 > Cheers,
-> 
+>=20
 > Dave.
 > --
 > Dave Chinner
 > david@fromorbit.com
-> 
-
-_______________________________________________
-xfs mailing list
-xfs@oss.sgi.com
-http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
+>=20
diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest
index 0db1dbf..e52abd3 100644
--- a/a/content_digest
+++ b/N1/content_digest
@@ -8,7 +8,8 @@
  "Date\0Thu, 23 May 2013 00:57:20 -0400 (EDT)\0"
  "To\0linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>"
  " linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org\0"
- "Cc\0LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>"
+ "Cc\0Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>"
+  LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
   Steve Best <sbest@redhat.com>
   xfs@oss.sgi.com
   stable@vger.kernel.org
@@ -19,17 +20,18 @@
  "http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2013-05/msg00683.html\n"
  "\n"
  "Also seen on Power7:\n"
- "http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=136927904900692&w=2\n"
+ "http://marc.info/?l=3Dlinux-kernel&m=3D136927904900692&w=3D2\n"
  "\n"
  "CAI Qian\n"
  "\n"
  "----- Original Message -----\n"
  "> From: \"Dave Chinner\" <david@fromorbit.com>\n"
  "> To: \"CAI Qian\" <caiqian@redhat.com>\n"
- "> Cc: \"LKML\" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, stable@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com\n"
+ "> Cc: \"LKML\" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, stable@vger.kernel.org, xfs@os=\n"
+ "s.sgi.com\n"
  "> Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 11:46:11 AM\n"
  "> Subject: Re: 3.9.2: xfstests triggered panic\n"
- "> \n"
+ ">=20\n"
  "> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 11:16:56PM -0400, CAI Qian wrote:\n"
  "> > ----- Original Message -----\n"
  "> > > From: \"Dave Chinner\" <david@fromorbit.com>\n"
@@ -38,103 +40,110 @@
  "> > > xfs@oss.sgi.com\n"
  "> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 5:53:00 PM\n"
  "> > > Subject: Re: 3.9.2: xfstests triggered panic\n"
- "> > > \n"
+ "> > >=20\n"
  "> > > On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 04:39:58AM -0400, CAI Qian wrote:\n"
  "> > > > Reproduced on almost all s390x guests by running xfstests.\n"
- "> > > > \n"
- "> > > > 14634.396658\302\250 XFS (dm-1): Mounting Filesystem\n"
- "> > > > 14634.525522\302\250 XFS (dm-1): Ending clean mount\n"
- "> > > > 14640.413007\302\250  <000000000017c6d4>\302\250 idle_balance+0x1a0/0x340\n"
- "> > > > 14640.413010\302\250  <000000000063303e>\302\250 __schedule+0xa22/0xaf0\n"
- "> > > > 14640.428279\302\250  <0000000000630da6>\302\250 schedule_timeout+0x186/0x2c0\n"
- "> > > > 14640.428289\302\250  <00000000001cf864>\302\250 rcu_gp_kthread+0x1bc/0x298\n"
- "> > > > 14640.428300\302\250  <0000000000158c5a>\302\250 kthread+0xe6/0xec\n"
- "> > > > 14640.428304\302\250  <0000000000634de6>\302\250 kernel_thread_starter+0x6/0xc\n"
- "> > > > 14640.428308\302\250  <0000000000634de0>\302\250 kernel_thread_starter+0x0/0xc\n"
- "> > > > 14640.428311\302\250 Last Breaking-Event-Address:\n"
- "> > > > 14640.428314\302\250  <000000000016bd76>\302\250 walk_tg_tree_from+0x3a/0xf4\n"
- "> > > > 14640.428319\302\250  list_add corruption. next->prev should be prev\n"
+ "> > > >=20\n"
+ "> > > > 14634.396658=C2=A8 XFS (dm-1): Mounting Filesystem\n"
+ "> > > > 14634.525522=C2=A8 XFS (dm-1): Ending clean mount\n"
+ "> > > > 14640.413007=C2=A8  <000000000017c6d4>=C2=A8 idle_balance+0x1a0/0x3=\n"
+ "40\n"
+ "> > > > 14640.413010=C2=A8  <000000000063303e>=C2=A8 __schedule+0xa22/0xaf0\n"
+ "> > > > 14640.428279=C2=A8  <0000000000630da6>=C2=A8 schedule_timeout+0x186=\n"
+ "/0x2c0\n"
+ "> > > > 14640.428289=C2=A8  <00000000001cf864>=C2=A8 rcu_gp_kthread+0x1bc/0=\n"
+ "x298\n"
+ "> > > > 14640.428300=C2=A8  <0000000000158c5a>=C2=A8 kthread+0xe6/0xec\n"
+ "> > > > 14640.428304=C2=A8  <0000000000634de6>=C2=A8 kernel_thread_starter+=\n"
+ "0x6/0xc\n"
+ "> > > > 14640.428308=C2=A8  <0000000000634de0>=C2=A8 kernel_thread_starter+=\n"
+ "0x0/0xc\n"
+ "> > > > 14640.428311=C2=A8 Last Breaking-Event-Address:\n"
+ "> > > > 14640.428314=C2=A8  <000000000016bd76>=C2=A8 walk_tg_tree_from+0x3a=\n"
+ "/0xf4\n"
+ "> > > > 14640.428319=C2=A8  list_add corruption. next->prev should be prev\n"
  "> > > > (0000000000000918\n"
- "> > > > ), but was           (null). (next=          (null)).\n"
- "> > > \n"
+ "> > > > ), but was           (null). (next=3D          (null)).\n"
+ "> > >=20\n"
  "> > > Where's XFS in this? walk_tg_tree_from() is part of the scheduler\n"
  "> > > code. This kind of implies a stack corruption....\n"
- "> > > \n"
+ "> > >=20\n"
  "> > > > Sometimes, this pops up,\n"
  "> > > > [16907.275002] WARNING: at kernel/rcutree.c:1960\n"
- "> > > > \n"
+ "> > > >=20\n"
  "> > > > or this,\n"
- "> > > > 15316.154171\302\250 XFS (dm-1): Mounting Filesystem\n"
- "> > > > 15316.255796\302\250 XFS (dm-1): Ending clean mount\n"
- "> > > > 15320.364246\302\250            00000000006367a2: e310b0080004        lg\n"
+ "> > > > 15316.154171=C2=A8 XFS (dm-1): Mounting Filesystem\n"
+ "> > > > 15316.255796=C2=A8 XFS (dm-1): Ending clean mount\n"
+ "> > > > 15320.364246=C2=A8            00000000006367a2: e310b0080004       =\n"
+ " lg\n"
  "> > > > %r1,8(%r\n"
  "> > > > 11)\n"
- "> > > > 15320.364249\302\250            00000000006367a8: 41101010            la\n"
+ "> > > > 15320.364249=C2=A8            00000000006367a8: 41101010           =\n"
+ " la\n"
  "> > > > %r1,16(%\n"
  "> > > > r1)\n"
- "> > > > 15320.364251\302\250            00000000006367ac: e33010000004        lg\n"
+ "> > > > 15320.364251=C2=A8            00000000006367ac: e33010000004       =\n"
+ " lg\n"
  "> > > > %r3,0(%r\n"
  "> > > > 1)\n"
- "> > > > 15320.364252\302\250 Call Trace:\n"
- "> > > > 15320.364252\302\250 Last Breaking-Event-Address:\n"
- "> > > > 15320.364253\302\250  \357\277\275 <0000000000000000>\302\250 Kernel stack overflow.\n"
- "> > > > 15320.364308\302\250 CPU: 0 Tainted: GF       W    3.9.2 #1\n"
- "> > > > 15320.364309\302\250 Process rhts-test-runne (pid: 625, task:\n"
+ "> > > > 15320.364252=C2=A8 Call Trace:\n"
+ "> > > > 15320.364252=C2=A8 Last Breaking-Event-Address:\n"
+ "> > > > 15320.364253=C2=A8  =EF=BF=BD <0000000000000000>=C2=A8 Kernel stack=\n"
+ " overflow.\n"
+ "> > > > 15320.364308=C2=A8 CPU: 0 Tainted: GF       W    3.9.2 #1\n"
+ "> > > > 15320.364309=C2=A8 Process rhts-test-runne (pid: 625, task:\n"
  "> > > > 000000003dccc890,\n"
  "> > > > ksp: 0\n"
- "> > > \n"
+ "> > >=20\n"
  "> > > .... and there you go - a stack overflow. Your kernel stack size is\n"
  "> > > too small.\n"
- "> > > \n"
+ "> > >=20\n"
  "> > > I'd suggest that you need 16k stacks on s390 - IIRC every function\n"
  "> > > call has 128 byte stack frame, and there are call chains 70-80\n"
  "> > > functions deep in the storage stack...\n"
  "> > Hmm, I am unsure how to set to 16k stack there\n"
- "> \n"
+ ">=20\n"
  "> Are you build a 64 bit s390 kernel or a 32 bit kernel? 32 bit\n"
  "> kernels only have an 8k stack size, 64 bit kernels are 16k (see\n"
  "> arch/s390/Makefile).\n"
- "> \n"
+ ">=20\n"
  "> $ git grep STACK_SIZE arch/s390 |head -2\n"
- "> arch/s390/Makefile:STACK_SIZE   := 8192\n"
- "> arch/s390/Makefile:STACK_SIZE   := 16384\n"
- "> \n"
+ "> arch/s390/Makefile:STACK_SIZE   :=3D 8192\n"
+ "> arch/s390/Makefile:STACK_SIZE   :=3D 16384\n"
+ ">=20\n"
  "> As it is, the stack frame usage is worse than I thought:\n"
- "> \n"
+ ">=20\n"
  "> $ git grep STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD arch/s390 |head -2\n"
- "> arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/ptrace.h:#define STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD 96      /*\n"
+ "> arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/ptrace.h:#define STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD 96      =\n"
+ "/*\n"
  "> size of minimum stack frame */\n"
- "> arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/ptrace.h:#define STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD 160      /*\n"
+ "> arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/ptrace.h:#define STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD 160     =\n"
+ " /*\n"
  "> size of minimum stack frame */\n"
- "> \n"
+ ">=20\n"
  "> Overhead is 96 bytes for 32 bit and 160 bytes for 64 bit. So 16k\n"
  "> stack size is going to have big troubles with a 70-80 function deep\n"
  "> call chain.\n"
- "> \n"
+ ">=20\n"
  "> As for powerpc:\n"
- "> \n"
+ ">=20\n"
  "> arch/powerpc/include/asm/ppc_asm.h:#define STACKFRAMESIZE 256\n"
- "> \n"
+ ">=20\n"
  "> Yeah, same issue.\n"
- "> \n"
+ ">=20\n"
  "> But, seriously, these stack traces are meaningless to anyone not\n"
  "> familiar with s390 or power7 - they indicate a problem detected\n"
  "> in the idle loop, not where ever the stack overran.\n"
- "> \n"
+ ">=20\n"
  "> Can you please work with the s390/power7 people to obtain whatever\n"
  "> stack it was that overflowed, and we can go from there.\n"
- "> \n"
+ ">=20\n"
  "> Cheers,\n"
- "> \n"
+ ">=20\n"
  "> Dave.\n"
  "> --\n"
  "> Dave Chinner\n"
  "> david@fromorbit.com\n"
- "> \n"
- "\n"
- "_______________________________________________\n"
- "xfs mailing list\n"
- "xfs@oss.sgi.com\n"
- http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
+ >=20
 
-4bf5bc1387704e1df0334a1f0281ac19fafa61caec7d6ba89def1d22c368d235
+bd69e4cf0ea1029907c6b123e3ba502327ab5ceca3190d6d9b76b0e4be25db49
