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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6105DC388F7 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 18:24:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03DFE206A1 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 18:24:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=oracle.com header.i=@oracle.com header.b="kSddjMmE" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729875AbgKISYk (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Nov 2020 13:24:40 -0500 Received: from aserp2130.oracle.com ([141.146.126.79]:33732 "EHLO aserp2130.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729119AbgKISYi (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Nov 2020 13:24:38 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (aserp2130.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp2130.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0A9IOBA7149678; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 18:24:34 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=date : from : to : cc : subject : message-id : references : mime-version : content-type : in-reply-to; s=corp-2020-01-29; bh=ZczM8jT2pX5OudjOCcgeUpVPt7vuG9fPdj0uqHUzPtU=; b=kSddjMmEUPZixXpEtEIclJS4Y+BfmJ3sX1cv2jnHzMIVGygGbCcYK7gwUf3Fd2tcXmQO rGxXzNkY5V5fx+V1HE5PWb0n4OWg6WR87o35qozKGNW3ijVYHrQ4d9Z5n38H+kDF8+KO 0FbkKDu9LTHwiIh654r/qQOwsZeWPebIUzSyebUc/dBG/UT4J2y42KSytLK/wUk2Hd42 klQa+4NJov85p3sXsYZUnz6Zv+TsLbwVZ9fFZSLThMqF7GshAtDNGQMEei9Rz/AsMUrZ NtwQG51KBh4hjhPG6myBeQLtgRo/Z4U1vbtUb19tryTVOMX/LgJ56bj2PzQNkgVS8IL6 dw== Received: from userp3020.oracle.com (userp3020.oracle.com [156.151.31.79]) by aserp2130.oracle.com with ESMTP id 34nh3aqpmj-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 09 Nov 2020 18:24:34 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (userp3020.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp3020.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0A9IB19E136667; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 18:22:33 GMT Received: from userv0122.oracle.com (userv0122.oracle.com [156.151.31.75]) by userp3020.oracle.com with ESMTP id 34p5bqv7vw-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 09 Nov 2020 18:22:33 +0000 Received: from abhmp0008.oracle.com (abhmp0008.oracle.com [141.146.116.14]) by userv0122.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 0A9IMWps029884; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 18:22:32 GMT Received: from localhost (/10.159.239.129) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Mon, 09 Nov 2020 10:22:32 -0800 Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 10:22:31 -0800 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: Amir Goldstein Cc: Sasha Levin , Eryu Guan , linux-xfs , fstests Subject: Re: Random xfs_check errors Message-ID: <20201109182231.GB9699@magnolia> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9800 signatures=668682 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 adultscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 bulkscore=0 suspectscore=1 mlxscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2011090126 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9800 signatures=668682 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 lowpriorityscore=0 priorityscore=1501 clxscore=1015 malwarescore=0 mlxscore=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=1 mlxlogscore=999 impostorscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2011090127 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: fstests@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 01:36:30PM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote: > Hi guys, > > I've been running the latest xfstests with xfsprogs v5.9 and stable > kernel v5.9.y past week (including v5.9.2 today) and I'm getting > reports like below after random tests. > > This one was after generic/466, but already got similar reports > (with more blocks) after generic/511,518,519 on different test runs. > > Is anyone else seeing this? > Any advice on what to look for? > > Did not get to test v5.10-rc1 yet. I thought I would ask here first > in case it's a known issue. > > Sasha, I am wondering which xfsprogs version are you using > when verifying stable kernel patches, because I have just recently > upgraded xfsprogs to v5.9 in my stable test environment. FWIW I patched xfs_check out of fstests years ago. Once Eric merges the large(ish) pile of xfs_repair patches I sent him for 5.10 I think we'll be at the point where there aren't any corruptions caught by xfs_check but not by xfs_repair. Soon I'll also submit my rewrite of the fstests fuzzer code to Eryu, and when that lands upstream then the rest of you will be able to check my assertion. Assuming none of you find new coverage holes that I didn't, we will finally be able to drop xfs_check (which is bitrotting) from fstests entirely. --D > Thanks, > Amir. > > > _check_xfs_filesystem: filesystem on > /dev/mapper/0fce4d2d--779b--44e8--91d0--2cb1b252f68e-xfs_scratch is > inconsistent (c) > *** xfs_check output *** > block 0/10 expected type unknown got free1 > agf_freeblks 1310702, counted 1310701 in ag 0 > agi_freecount 61, counted 58 in ag 0 > sb_ifree 61, counted 58 > sb_fdblocks 5240288, counted 5240287 > sb_fdblocks 5240288, aggregate AGF count 5240287 > *** end xfs_check output