From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexander Zhavnerchik Subject: Re: WARNING: at fs/inode.c:884 unlock_new_inode+0x34/0x59() Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 15:38:52 +0300 Message-ID: <4ED380DC.3030707@gmail.com> References: <4ED2994A.9080907@gmail.com> <4ED29C63.8070601@gmail.com> <20111127213432.GA22465@thunk.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: adilger.kernel@dilger.ca, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org To: Ted Ts'o Return-path: Received: from mail-yx0-f174.google.com ([209.85.213.174]:42777 "EHLO mail-yx0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752750Ab1K1Mi6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Nov 2011 07:38:58 -0500 Received: by yenl6 with SMTP id l6so2800755yen.19 for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2011 04:38:57 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20111127213432.GA22465@thunk.org> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Ted, Unfortunately my laptop died today and I can't retest this issue. I'll provide more information once and if I repair it. Thanks, Alex On 28.11.2011 00:34, Ted Ts'o wrote: > On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 11:24:03PM +0300, Alex wrote: >> BTW, after last resume from disk fs was corrupted but fsck managed >> to fix this error. So I think severity of this issue should be >> raised. > Can you reproduce this reliably? What was running at the time of the s2disk? > > What appears to be going on is that insert_inode_locked() is failing > at fs/ext4/ialloc.c:887, probably because there's another inode with > that inode number already on the superblock's hash list. The error > codepath if insert_inode_locked() fail is incorrect; it's going to > fail_drop, which tries dropping the inode's dquot (but we haven't > calle ddquot_initialize)inode) yet) and calls unlock_new_inode(), but > I_NEW hasn't been set because insert_inode_locked(). > > So the warning is easy to fix; we just need to have it jump to fail > instead of fail_drop. But the bigger issue is why did > insert_inode_locked() failed in the first place. > > Did this error happen *right* after the system resumed, or did some > amount of time pass before the warning triggered? This could have > happened because the in-memory (or possibly on-disk) copy of the inode > allocation bitmap has gotten corrupted, for example. > > What was the nature of the file system corruption which e2fsck decided > that it need to correct? > > Regards, > > - Ted