From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [xfs-masters] 2.6.29-rc: kernel BUG at fs/xfs/support/debug.c:108 Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 08:18:48 +1100 Message-ID: <20090112211848.GL8071@disturbed> References: <20090110143924.GA25900@infradead.org> <20090110152803.GA7469@infradead.org> <20090110221459.GA8873@orion> <20090111104659.GB8071@disturbed> <20090112034550.GI8071@disturbed> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: kernel-testers-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Alexander Beregalov Cc: Christoph Hellwig , xfs-masters-VZNHf3L845pBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org, xfs-VZNHf3L845pBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org, kernel-testers-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 11:08:55AM +0300, Alexander Beregalov wrote: > 2009/1/12 Dave Chinner : > > On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 03:48:13AM +0300, Alexander Beregalov wrote: > >> > Hmmmm - this might be getting closer to the source of the bug. > >> > It's being detecting when reading in the buffer to do a left shift > >> > now, not during the delete of a record. > >> > > >> > I'd suggest that you treat this as the same failure and continue > >> > the bisect to try to find when no problems show up at all. > >> > >> 687b890a184fef263ebb773926e1f4aa69240d01 is the first bad commit. > > > > [XFS] implement generic xfs_btree_lshift > > > > Make the btree left shift code generic. Based on a patch from David > > Chinner with lots of changes to follow the original btree implementations > > more closely. While this loses some of the generic helper routines for > > inserting/moving/removing records it also solves some of the one off bugs > > in the original code and makes it easier to verify. > > > >> Does it make sense? > > > > Yes, a bug in that patch could corrupt the btree in memory which we then trip > > over later in delrec before it has been written to disk. > > > > Thank you for isolating the problem to that commit - it greatly narrows down > > the amount of code we need to search to find the bug. I'll have a look tonight > > to see if I can spot the problem. > > It seems 9eaead5 (implement generic xfs_btree_rshift) is really guilty, unless > the bug "XFS internal error xfs_btree_check_lblock at line 200 of file > fs/xfs/xfs_btree.c:" > which I posted 5 hours ago is completely different from the original > bug message. > I can not reproduce the bug on 278d0ca14. Ok, Thanks for clarifying. ;) I'll have a look through the rshift patch and try to find what we broke by inspection. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david-FqsqvQoI3Ljby3iVrkZq2A@public.gmane.org