From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: XFS assertion from truncate. (3.10-rc2)
Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 08:09:33 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130522220933.GV24543@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130522161946.GA25906@redhat.com>
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 12:19:46PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 10:22:52AM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 03:51:47PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> >
> > > > Tomorrow I'll also try running some older kernels with the same
> > > > options to see if it's something new, or an older bug. This is a
> > > > new machine, so it may be something that's been around for a
> > > > while, and for whatever reason, my other machines don't hit
> > > > this.
> > >
> > > Another thing that just occurred to me - what compiler are you
> > > using? We had a report last week on #xfs that xfsdump was failing
> > > with bad checksums because of link time optimisation (LTO) in
> > > gcc-4.8.0. When they turned that off, everything worked fine. So if
> > > you are using 4.8.0, perhaps trying a different compiler might be a
> > > good idea, too.
> >
> > Yeah, this is 4.8.0. This box is running F19-beta.
> > I managed to shoehorn the gcc-4.7 from f18 on there though.
> > Bug reproduced instantly, so I think we can rule out compiler.
> >
> > I ran 3.9 with the same debug options. Seems stable.
> > I'll do a bisect.
>
> good news. It wasn't until I started bisecting I realised I was still
> carrying this patch from you to fix slab corruption I was seeing.
>
> It seems to be the culprit (or is masking another problem -- I had to apply
> it at each step of the bisect to get past the slab corruption bug).
That doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. The fix in the xfsdev
tree is a little different:
http://oss.sgi.com/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=xfs/xfs.git;a=commitdiff;h=52c24ad39ff02d7bd73c92eb0c926fb44984a41d
but I can't set how this makes any difference to the problem at all.
See my previous post about the fact that 0xa068 is actually a valid
mask and should not be tripping the assert....
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: XFS assertion from truncate. (3.10-rc2)
Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 08:09:33 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130522220933.GV24543@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130522161946.GA25906@redhat.com>
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 12:19:46PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 10:22:52AM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 03:51:47PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> >
> > > > Tomorrow I'll also try running some older kernels with the same
> > > > options to see if it's something new, or an older bug. This is a
> > > > new machine, so it may be something that's been around for a
> > > > while, and for whatever reason, my other machines don't hit
> > > > this.
> > >
> > > Another thing that just occurred to me - what compiler are you
> > > using? We had a report last week on #xfs that xfsdump was failing
> > > with bad checksums because of link time optimisation (LTO) in
> > > gcc-4.8.0. When they turned that off, everything worked fine. So if
> > > you are using 4.8.0, perhaps trying a different compiler might be a
> > > good idea, too.
> >
> > Yeah, this is 4.8.0. This box is running F19-beta.
> > I managed to shoehorn the gcc-4.7 from f18 on there though.
> > Bug reproduced instantly, so I think we can rule out compiler.
> >
> > I ran 3.9 with the same debug options. Seems stable.
> > I'll do a bisect.
>
> good news. It wasn't until I started bisecting I realised I was still
> carrying this patch from you to fix slab corruption I was seeing.
>
> It seems to be the culprit (or is masking another problem -- I had to apply
> it at each step of the bisect to get past the slab corruption bug).
That doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. The fix in the xfsdev
tree is a little different:
http://oss.sgi.com/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=xfs/xfs.git;a=commitdiff;h=52c24ad39ff02d7bd73c92eb0c926fb44984a41d
but I can't set how this makes any difference to the problem at all.
See my previous post about the fact that 0xa068 is actually a valid
mask and should not be tripping the assert....
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-22 22:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-21 22:52 XFS assertion from truncate. (3.10-rc2) Dave Jones
2013-05-21 22:52 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-21 23:34 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-21 23:34 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-21 23:40 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-21 23:40 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-21 23:54 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-21 23:54 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-22 0:08 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-22 0:08 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-22 0:16 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-22 0:16 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-22 2:56 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-22 2:56 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-22 4:03 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-22 4:03 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-22 4:15 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-22 4:15 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-22 5:12 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-22 5:12 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-22 5:29 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-22 5:29 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-22 5:51 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-22 5:51 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-22 14:22 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-22 14:22 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-22 16:19 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-22 16:19 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-22 22:09 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2013-05-22 22:09 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-22 23:53 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-22 23:53 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-23 15:17 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-23 15:17 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-23 18:13 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-23 18:13 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-22 21:54 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-22 21:54 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-23 18:49 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-23 18:49 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-23 22:30 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-23 22:30 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-24 0:49 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-24 0:49 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-24 1:26 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-24 1:26 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-24 1:36 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-24 1:36 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-24 1:52 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-24 1:52 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-24 3:03 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-24 3:03 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-24 8:03 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-24 8:03 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-24 20:16 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-24 20:16 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-25 4:58 ` Eric Sandeen
2013-05-25 4:58 ` Eric Sandeen
2013-05-25 6:39 ` Stan Hoeppner
2013-05-26 22:43 ` Dave Chinner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130522220933.GV24543@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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.