All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kamal Dasu <kdasu.kdev@gmail.com>
To: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: xfs filesystem corruption with kernel 2.6.37
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 13:18:13 -0800 (PST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <34662440.post@talk.nabble.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121103222518.GH29378@dastard>


Dave,

On more analysis of the corrupt disks seems exhibit a problem with duplicate
rt inode extents.

On mount this would be the assert:
 prev.br_state == XFS_EXT_NORM assert with Anita disk)
Starting XFS recovery on filesystem: sda2 (logdev: internal)
Assertion failed: del.br_startblock == prev.br_startblock +
prev.br_blockcount, file: fs/xfs/xfs_bmap.c, line: 5201

# xfs_repair –n /dev/sda2 –r /dev/sda3
..
..
Phase 2 - using internal log
        - scan filesystem freespace and inode maps...
agi unlinked bucket 38 is 138790 in ag 3 (inode=50470438)
..
..
Phase 4 - check for duplicate blocks...
        - setting up duplicate extent list...
        - check for inodes claiming duplicate blocks...
        - agno = 0
        - agno = 1
        - agno = 2
        - agno = 3
data fork in rt ino 50470438 claims dup rt extent,off - 1024, start -
12963072, count 160
bad data fork in inode 50470438
would have cleared inode 50470438

sh-3.1# xfs_db  /dev/sda2
xfs_db> inode 50470438
xfs_db> bmap
data offset 0 startblock 11024384 (10/538624) count 256 flag 0
data offset 1024 startblock 12963072 (12/380160) count 160 flag 1
data offset 1184 startblock 12963232 (12/380320) count 1120 flag 0
data offset 2304 startblock 12951808 (12/368896) count 1024 flag 0
data offset 3328 startblock 12824064 (12/241152) count 768 flag 0
data offset 6356034 startblock 2392537314989568 (2281701388/366080) count
928 flag 0

Similar problem in context of xfs_repair was reported with respect to
realtime extents on 2.6.37. Seems like unaligned extent size can cause
sharing of the  unwritten free part of a written  with the next allocated
unwritten adjecent extent .  During runtime (with XFS_DEBUG enabled) we do
notice that the same extent is being unlinked multiple times and an assert
for.

Assertion failed: fsb != NULLFSBLOCK, file: fs/xfs/xfs_rtalloc.c, line: 875
 
I am wondering if this can cause corruption when it happens during runtime
without XFS_DEBUG build.

I was looking at a similar thread where you have commented regarding a
possible fix in the kernel bug duplicate extent which overlap due unaligned
rt extent size calculation.

http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2012-09/msg00292.html

Thanks
Kamal
-- 
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/xfs-filesystem-corruption-with-kernel-2.6.37-tp34601185p34662440.html
Sent from the Xfs - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

      reply	other threads:[~2012-11-09 21:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-10-25 13:45 xfs filesystem corruption with kernel 2.6.37 Kamal Dasu
2012-10-25 22:47 ` Dave Chinner
2012-11-01 19:30   ` Kamal Dasu
2012-11-02  1:27     ` Dave Chinner
2012-11-02 16:34       ` Kamal Dasu
2012-11-02 22:55         ` Dave Chinner
2012-11-03  1:57           ` Kamal Dasu
2012-11-03 22:25             ` Dave Chinner
2012-11-09 21:18               ` Kamal Dasu [this message]

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=34662440.post@talk.nabble.com \
    --to=kdasu.kdev@gmail.com \
    --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.