From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA589C433F5 for ; Fri, 18 Mar 2022 22:39:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235558AbiCRWkg (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Mar 2022 18:40:36 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:40426 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234474AbiCRWkg (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Mar 2022 18:40:36 -0400 Received: from mail104.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail104.syd.optusnet.com.au [211.29.132.246]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19DC214A900 for ; Fri, 18 Mar 2022 15:39:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dread.disaster.area (pa49-186-150-27.pa.vic.optusnet.com.au [49.186.150.27]) by mail104.syd.optusnet.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB980533E2B; Sat, 19 Mar 2022 09:39:14 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from dave by dread.disaster.area with local (Exim 4.92.3) (envelope-from ) id 1nVLFZ-0076kg-EE; Sat, 19 Mar 2022 09:39:13 +1100 Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2022 09:39:13 +1100 From: Dave Chinner To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: Brian Foster , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [BUG] log I/O completion GPF via xfs/006 and xfs/264 on 5.17.0-rc8 Message-ID: <20220318223913.GI1544202@dread.disaster.area> References: <20220318214831.GH1544202@dread.disaster.area> <20220318215133.GG8224@magnolia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220318215133.GG8224@magnolia> X-Optus-CM-Score: 0 X-Optus-CM-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=deDjYVbe c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=62350a13 a=sPqof0Mm7fxWrhYUF33ZaQ==:117 a=sPqof0Mm7fxWrhYUF33ZaQ==:17 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=o8Y5sQTvuykA:10 a=7-415B0cAAAA:8 a=ZrunVXCFrEudtIzgIHEA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=biEYGPWJfzWAr4FL6Ov7:22 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 02:51:33PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Sat, Mar 19, 2022 at 08:48:31AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 09:46:53AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I'm not sure if this is known and/or fixed already, but it didn't look > > > familiar so here is a report. I hit a splat when testing Willy's > > > prospective folio bookmark change and it turns out it replicates on > > > Linus' current master (551acdc3c3d2). This initially reproduced on > > > xfs/264 (mkfs defaults) and I saw a soft lockup warning variant via > > > xfs/006, but when I attempted to reproduce the latter a second time I > > > hit what looks like the same problem as xfs/264. Both tests seem to > > > involve some form of error injection, so possibly the same underlying > > > problem. The GPF splat from xfs/264 is below. > > > > On a side note, I'm wondering if we should add xfs/006 and xfs/264 > > to the recoveryloop group - they do a shutdown under load and a > > followup mount to ensure the filesystem gets recovered before > > the test ends and the fs is checked, so while thy don't explicitly > > test recovery, they do exercise it.... > > > > Thoughts? > > Someone else asked about this the other day, and I proposed a 'recovery' > group for tests that don't run in a loop. That distinction is largely meaningless to me. I tend to think of "recoveryloop" as the recovery tests I want to run in a long running loop via iteration. e.g. isomething like 'check -I 250 -g recoveryloop'. I don't really care if the tests loop internally doing multiple recoveries - I'm wanting to run the recovery tests that reproduce problems frequeently in a tight loop repeatedly. Hence I think we should just lump the shutdown+recovery tests all in one group so that when we want to exercise shutdown/recovery we just have one single group to run repeatedly in a loop. Whether that group is named 'recovery' or 'recoveryloop' is largely irrelevant to me. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com