* WARNING: at fs/btrfs/inode.c:2222
@ 2012-01-27 17:31 Sage Weil
2012-01-27 17:40 ` Chris Mason
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Sage Weil @ 2012-01-27 17:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-btrfs
Has anyone see this one before? We've been hitting it sporatically for a
while now, although recently we've been able to trigger pretty easily.
The result is EINVAL from the snap create ioctl.
The kernel is v3.2 + some ceph stuff.
The code in question is
/* if we have links, this was a truncate, lets do that */
if (inode->i_nlink) {
if (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode)) {
WARN_ON(1);
iput(inode);
continue;
}
Is this something obvious, or should we spend some time chasing it down?
sage
2012-01-27T03:45:07.863424-08:00 sepia95 kernel: [55980.217352] ------------[ cut here ]------------
2012-01-27T03:45:07.863501-08:00 sepia95 kernel: [55980.217403] WARNING: at /srv/autobuild-ceph/gitbuilder.git/build/fs/btrfs/inode.c:2222 btrfs_orphan_cleanup+0xce/0x4e0 [btrfs]()
2012-01-27T03:45:07.863881-08:00 sepia95 kernel: [55980.217413] Hardware name: X6DVA
2012-01-27T03:45:07.864092-08:00 sepia95 kernel: [55980.217420] Modules linked in: ufs qnx4 hfsplus hfs minix ntfs vfat msdos fat jfs xfs exportfs reiserfs psmouse ppdev parport_pc e752x_edac lp edac_core parport serio_raw shpchp e1000 btrfs floppy zlib_deflate crc32c libcrc32c
2012-01-27T03:45:07.864322-08:00 sepia95 kernel: [55980.217502] Pid: 12666, comm: ceph-osd Not tainted 3.2.0-ceph-00037-gc68bdb1 #1
2012-01-27T03:45:07.864531-08:00 sepia95 kernel: [55980.217511] Call Trace:
2012-01-27T03:45:07.864549-08:00 sepia95 kernel: [55980.217529] [<ffffffff810634af>] warn_slowpath_common+0x7f/0xc0
2012-01-27T03:45:07.864564-08:00 sepia95 kernel: [55980.217542] [<ffffffff8106350a>] warn_slowpath_null+0x1a/0x20
2012-01-27T03:45:07.864605-08:00 sepia95 kernel: [55980.217578] [<ffffffffa004215e>] btrfs_orphan_cleanup+0xce/0x4e0 [btrfs]
2012-01-27T03:45:07.864619-08:00 sepia95 kernel: [55980.217596] [<ffffffff8131bffe>] ? do_raw_spin_unlock+0x5e/0xb0
2012-01-27T03:45:07.864648-08:00 sepia95 kernel: [55980.217632] [<ffffffffa0068b62>] btrfs_mksubvol+0x302/0x3d0 [btrfs]
2012-01-27T03:45:07.864661-08:00 sepia95 kernel: [55980.217668] [<ffffffffa0068d18>] btrfs_ioctl_snap_create_transid+0xe8/0x180 [btrfs]
2012-01-27T03:45:07.864675-08:00 sepia95 kernel: [55980.217704] [<ffffffffa0068e39>] btrfs_ioctl_snap_create_v2+0x89/0x100 [btrfs]
2012-01-27T03:45:07.864688-08:00 sepia95 kernel: [55980.217719] [<ffffffff8109f730>] ? __lock_acquire+0x210/0x15d0
2012-01-27T03:45:07.864711-08:00 sepia95 kernel: [55980.217752] [<ffffffffa006989a>] btrfs_ioctl+0x59a/0x1060 [btrfs]
2012-01-27T03:45:07.864725-08:00 sepia95 kernel: [55980.217768] [<ffffffff81178040>] ? fget_light+0x40/0x130
2012-01-27T03:45:07.864739-08:00 sepia95 kernel: [55980.217780] [<ffffffff81188714>] do_vfs_ioctl+0xa4/0x580
2012-01-27T03:45:07.864752-08:00 sepia95 kernel: [55980.217793] [<ffffffff811780d2>] ? fget_light+0xd2/0x130
2012-01-27T03:45:07.864775-08:00 sepia95 kernel: [55980.217804] [<ffffffff81178040>] ? fget_light+0x40/0x130
2012-01-27T03:45:07.864789-08:00 sepia95 kernel: [55980.217817] [<ffffffff81188c91>] sys_ioctl+0xa1/0xb0
2012-01-27T03:45:07.864803-08:00 sepia95 kernel: [55980.217831] [<ffffffff8160e1c2>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
2012-01-27T03:45:07.864816-08:00 sepia95 kernel: [55980.217841] ---[ end trace 7be8f23802b76936 ]---
2012-01-27T03:45:07.864829-08:00 sepia95 kernel: [55980.217871] btrfs: Error removing orphan entry, stopping orphan cleanup
2012-01-27T03:45:07.864852-08:00 sepia95 kernel: [55980.224667] btrfs: could not do orphan cleanup -22
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: WARNING: at fs/btrfs/inode.c:2222
2012-01-27 17:31 WARNING: at fs/btrfs/inode.c:2222 Sage Weil
@ 2012-01-27 17:40 ` Chris Mason
2012-01-27 17:52 ` Sage Weil
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Chris Mason @ 2012-01-27 17:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sage Weil; +Cc: linux-btrfs
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 09:31:46AM -0800, Sage Weil wrote:
> Has anyone see this one before? We've been hitting it sporatically for a
> while now, although recently we've been able to trigger pretty easily.
> The result is EINVAL from the snap create ioctl.
>
> The kernel is v3.2 + some ceph stuff.
>
> The code in question is
>
> /* if we have links, this was a truncate, lets do that */
> if (inode->i_nlink) {
> if (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode)) {
> WARN_ON(1);
> iput(inode);
> continue;
> }
>
> Is this something obvious, or should we spend some time chasing it down?
This doesn't seem right, we've got an orphan on a directory for a
truncate? The link count is probably 1, but no I haven't seen this.
-chris
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: WARNING: at fs/btrfs/inode.c:2222
2012-01-27 17:40 ` Chris Mason
@ 2012-01-27 17:52 ` Sage Weil
2012-02-09 2:18 ` Sage Weil
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Sage Weil @ 2012-01-27 17:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chris Mason; +Cc: linux-btrfs
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 09:31:46AM -0800, Sage Weil wrote:
> > Has anyone see this one before? We've been hitting it sporatically for a
> > while now, although recently we've been able to trigger pretty easily.
> > The result is EINVAL from the snap create ioctl.
> >
> > The kernel is v3.2 + some ceph stuff.
> >
> > The code in question is
> >
> > /* if we have links, this was a truncate, lets do that */
> > if (inode->i_nlink) {
> > if (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode)) {
> > WARN_ON(1);
> > iput(inode);
> > continue;
> > }
> >
> > Is this something obvious, or should we spend some time chasing it down?
>
> This doesn't seem right, we've got an orphan on a directory for a
> truncate? The link count is probably 1, but no I haven't seen this.
Okay, looking into it. Thanks!
sage
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: WARNING: at fs/btrfs/inode.c:2222
2012-01-27 17:52 ` Sage Weil
@ 2012-02-09 2:18 ` Sage Weil
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Sage Weil @ 2012-02-09 2:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-btrfs
I've made a little progress here. The rmdir succeeds and successfully
adds the orphan item to the tree. Shortly after that, we (async) snapshot
current/ to snap_127294/. And then the orphan cleanup gets
[87552.240450] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[87552.240477] WARNING: at /srv/autobuild-ceph/gitbuilder.git/build/fs/btrfs/inode.c:2237 btrfs_orphan_cleanup+0x44b/0x4d0 [btrfs]()
[87552.240480] Hardware name: PDSMi
[87552.240482] Modules linked in: radeon ttm drm_kms_helper drm ppdev
parport_pc lp serio_raw parport i3000_edac edac_core i2c_algo_bit shpchp
ahci libahci floppy e1000e btrfs zlib_deflate crc32c libcrc32c
[87552.240504] Pid: 20605, comm: ceph-osd Not tainted 3.2.0-ceph-00142-g9e98323 #1
[87552.240507] Call Trace:
[87552.240514] [<ffffffff810634af>] warn_slowpath_common+0x7f/0xc0
[87552.240518] [<ffffffff8106350a>] warn_slowpath_null+0x1a/0x20
[87552.240531] [<ffffffffa004a49b>] btrfs_orphan_cleanup+0x44b/0x4d0 [btrfs]
[87552.240536] [<ffffffff8131bffe>] ? do_raw_spin_unlock+0x5e/0xb0
[87552.240550] [<ffffffffa006cd42>] btrfs_mksubvol+0x302/0x3d0 [btrfs]
[87552.240564] [<ffffffffa006cef8>] btrfs_ioctl_snap_create_transid+0xe8/0x180 [btrfs]
[87552.240578] [<ffffffffa006d019>] btrfs_ioctl_snap_create_v2+0x89/0x100 [btrfs]
[87552.240582] [<ffffffff8109f730>] ? __lock_acquire+0x210/0x15d0
[87552.240596] [<ffffffffa006d8fc>] btrfs_ioctl+0x41c/0x1290 [btrfs]
[87552.240601] [<ffffffff816062b4>] ? retint_restore_args+0x13/0x13
[87552.240606] [<ffffffff81178040>] ? fget_light+0x40/0x130
[87552.240610] [<ffffffff81188714>] do_vfs_ioctl+0xa4/0x580
[87552.240614] [<ffffffff811780d2>] ? fget_light+0xd2/0x130
[87552.240617] [<ffffffff81178040>] ? fget_light+0x40/0x130
[87552.240620] [<ffffffff81188c91>] sys_ioctl+0xa1/0xb0
[87552.240624] [<ffffffff8160e1c2>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
[87552.240627] ---[ end trace 3842aca7e75013c8 ]---
[87552.240643] btrfs: Error removing orphan entry, stopping orphan cleanup
causing the ioctl to return -22. ls -al shows
drwxr-xr-x 1 ubuntu ubuntu 42 2012-02-08 16:12 current
-rw-r--r-- 1 ubuntu ubuntu 37 2012-02-08 15:00 fsid
-rw-r--r-- 1 ubuntu ubuntu 21 2012-02-08 15:00 magic
drwxr-xr-x 1 ubuntu ubuntu 234 2012-02-08 16:12 snap_127219
drwxr-xr-x 1 ubuntu ubuntu 158 2012-02-08 16:12 snap_127249
d????????? ? ? ? ? ? snap_127294
(presumably just because we errored out of create_snapshot() before
d_instantiate?)
The inode it processes has ino 28844 uid/gid 1000.1000 mode 040755 size
60... and nlink=1.
btrfs-debug-tree output includes
item 1 key (28844 INODE_ITEM 0) itemoff 59 itemsize 160
inode generation 13654 size 60 block group 0 mode 40755 links 1
in three subvols: snap_127219 snap_127249 snap_127294. Not current.
The first two snaps were taken prior to the rmdir, so that's fine. But
the last one just after... the sequence of operations was actually
thread 0 start async snap ioctl, current/ to snap_127294/ ...
thread 1 rmdir current/0.17_254 = 0 (this is the bad dir inode)
thread 1 unlink current/foo (unrelated)
thread 1 unlink current/bar (unrelated)
thread 1 rmdir current/0.17_head = 0 (unrelated)
thread 0 ...ioctl returns = -EINVAL
It looks like there is some strange leakage between the snapshot and the
rmdir nlink->0, or some strange interaction between the orphan cleanup and
the new snapshot. I'm not quite sure why the orphan cleanup is actually
done there at all, though, so...
Any suggestions where to look next?
sage
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-02-09 2:18 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2012-01-27 17:31 WARNING: at fs/btrfs/inode.c:2222 Sage Weil
2012-01-27 17:40 ` Chris Mason
2012-01-27 17:52 ` Sage Weil
2012-02-09 2:18 ` Sage Weil
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.