From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.fusionio.com ([66.114.96.30]:45680 "EHLO mx1.fusionio.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752113Ab2FYTKn (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Jun 2012 15:10:43 -0400 Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 15:10:40 -0400 From: Josef Bacik To: Alex Lyakas CC: "linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: fio reports data corruption with btrfs Message-ID: <20120625191039.GE7404@localhost.localdomain> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 12:30:34PM -0600, Alex Lyakas wrote: > Greetings everybody, > > I am running a fio test on btrfs compiled from > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git, > up to commit: > cb77fcd88569cd2b7b25ecd4086ea932a53be9b3 Btrfs: delay iput with async extents > including this commit. > > Below is a fio configuration file, and later fio textual output. > Here: > https://docs.google.com/folder/d/0B1AuaIB8xZtbNTRuSW1zVGozWFE/edit > are "expected" vs "received" mismatch reports. Strangely, when I read > the mismatched block from the file reported as corrupted by fio, I > receive data different both from "expected" and "received" blocks that > fio reports. I added one such file (job0.1.0.88576.now) to the > pastebin as well. > > If you think that my fio configuration file is faulty, please let me > know. fio version is 1.59. The idea is to run 10 io processes in > parallel. > Mount options? I'm running the test now, I'll let you know if I can reproduce. Thanks, Josef