Re: 2.6.21-git10/11: files getting truncated on xfs? or maybe an nlink problem?

[Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>]

On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 07:46:33AM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> David Chinner wrote:
> > On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 05:54:09PM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> >   
> >> David Chinner wrote:
> >>     
> >>> Suspend-resume, eh?
> >>>
> >>> There's an immediate suspect. Can you test this specifically for us?
> >>> i.e. download a known good file set, do some stuff, suspend, resume,
> >>> then check the files? If it doesn't show up the first time, can
> >>> you do it a few times just to rule it out?
> >>>       
> >> Well, I've been doing suspend-resume with xfs for a while without
> >> problems; the problems seem to be recent and easily repeatable.  Which
> >> just means that it could be a new suspend-resume problem, of course.
> >>     
> >
> > Ok. I'm just trying to find a relatively simple test case for the
> > problem - seeing as you seem to be able to reliably reproduce this
> > we should be able to work out the trigger...
> >   
> 
> OK, I was able to reproduce it reliably with a script with did basically:
> 
>     for i in `seq 20`; do
>     	hg clone -U --pull a b-$i
>     	hg verify b-$i		# always OK
>     	umount /home
>     	sleep 5
>     	mount /home
>     	hg verify b-$i		# often found truncated files
>     done
>       
> 
> No suspend/resumes involved.  The trees are linux kernel ones, so fairly
> large, but small enough to fit entirely in core.  My script also
> captured xfs_bmap before/after output for files which had tended to be
> corrupted in the past, but unfortunately none of them got corrupted in
> these tests.  But I do have all the trees lying around to extract more
> detail for if you like.
> 
> Interestingly, the corruption happened in each case around the same
> place in the tree, often in the sata drivers.  I wonder if that was just
> related to the timing of this script.

I guess this pins it as an XFS problem pretty solidly.

This test looks like it should consist solely of open-for-append and
write on about 20k files in the target directory. Because of the
--pull, no hardlinks are involved. It shouldn't be all that different
from doing tar cf - a | tar xf - b.

The files get visited in alphabetical order, so the start of the
corruption may be telling.

-- 
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.