From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Mason Subject: Re: kernel bug in file-item.c Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 14:30:41 -0400 Message-ID: <1241029841.20099.53.camel@think.oraclecorp.com> References: <49F73F69.4010205@oel.state.nj.us> <1240946633.15136.55.camel@think.oraclecorp.com> <49F87A7F.7090804@oel.state.nj.us> <1241027618.20099.48.camel@think.oraclecorp.com> <49F89AB4.2090001@oel.state.nj.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org To: mroconnor@oel.state.nj.us Return-path: In-Reply-To: <49F89AB4.2090001@oel.state.nj.us> List-ID: On Wed, 2009-04-29 at 14:21 -0400, Marc R. O'Connor wrote: > > Chris Mason wrote: > > On Wed, 2009-04-29 at 12:04 -0400, Marc R. O'Connor wrote: > >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >> Hash: SHA1 > >> > >> full file-item.c attached > >> > >> Chris Mason wrote: > >>> On Tue, 2009-04-28 at 13:39 -0400, Marc R. O'Connor wrote: > >>>> I have had two 'kernel bug' issues today both referencing file-item.c. > >>>> The first oops happened when i was cp'ing from and external HD(ext3) to > >>>> and ext3 partition. The second happened during boot up. I have attached > >>>> them both. > >>>> > >>>> Im using btrfs that was merged into my kernel yesterday. > >>>> > >>>> plain text document attachment (btrfs_bug_1) > >>>> Apr 28 10:55:10 cosmo2 ------------[ cut here ]------------ > >>>> Apr 28 10:55:10 cosmo2 kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/file-item.c:494! > >>> Well, I think I see the bug. It looks like we want to do > >>> > >>> - if (key->offset < bytenr && csum_end <= end_byte) { > >>> + if (key->offset <= bytenr && csum_end <= end_byte) { > >>> > >>> in truncate_one_csum. But I need to test that here for a bit and send > >>> you a patch. > > > > Ok, line 494 is actually this one ;) > > > > key->offset = end_byte; > > ret = btrfs_set_item_key_safe(trans, root, path, key); > > BUG_ON(ret); <---- 494 > > > > Which means we're finding things out of order in the btree leaf. > > > > Could you please run btrfsck on this filesystem? > > > I have done that on all btrfs partitions I have and btrfsck did not > return anything odd. > In that case, the bad ordering is being introduced at run time. Could you please run memtest86 on the box? -chris