From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Jim Schutt" Subject: Re: kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/extent_io.c:3982! Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 10:41:29 -0600 Message-ID: <4FA01239.7080907@sandia.gov> References: <4F848C62.6030100@sandia.gov> <20120411190926.GE2506@localhost.localdomain> <4F85E87E.90804@sandia.gov> <20120501160047.GA2050@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org To: "Josef Bacik" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20120501160047.GA2050@localhost.localdomain> List-ID: On 05/01/2012 10:00 AM, Josef Bacik wrote: > On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 02:24:30PM -0600, Jim Schutt wrote: >> On 04/11/2012 01:09 PM, Josef Bacik wrote: >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 01:39:14PM -0600, Jim Schutt wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I hit this BUG today. >>>> >>>> I'm running 3.3.1 merged with the ceph and btrfs bits for 3.4, >>>> i.e. 3.3.1 + >>>> commit bc3f116fec194 "Btrfs: update the checks for mixed block groups with big metadata blocks" >>>> commit c666601a935b9 "rbd: move snap_rwsem to the device, rename to header_rwsem" >>>> >>>> The btrfs filesystem in question is backing a Ceph OSD under >>>> a heavy write load. >>>> >>>> Here's the bug: >>>> >>> >>> Can you give this a whirl and let me know how it goes? If I'm right you should >>> see a warning pop up in your messages. Thanks, >> >> OK, I've got my test running with your patch applied >> to my previous kernel. >> >> Do you expect your warning to only fire when my >> previous kernel would have BUGged? I ask because I've >> only seen the BUG once, so it may be a low-probability >> occurrence. >> >> It seems like I should keep testing until I see either >> your new warning or the BUG, right? > > Hey Jim, > > I just sent a patch to the list > > [PATCH] Btrfs: fix page leak when allocing extent buffers > > Could you try that and see if you can reproduce your problem? Taking it for a spin now... Thanks -- Jim > Thanks, > > Josef >