From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Fri, 11 Jul 2008 16:21:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com ([192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m6BNL0kO028620 for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 16:21:02 -0700 Received: from ipmail01.adl6.internode.on.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id CE7A618BA5D2 for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 16:22:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ipmail01.adl6.internode.on.net (ipmail01.adl6.internode.on.net [203.16.214.146]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id ytiqRef8R371SCtV for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 16:22:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2008 09:22:01 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: xfs bug in 2.6.26-rc9 Message-ID: <20080711232201.GG11558@disturbed> References: <20080711084248.GU29319@disturbed> <20080711190209.GA7401@Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080711190209.GA7401@Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc> Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Sebastian Siewior Cc: Mikael Abrahamsson , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 09:02:09PM +0200, Sebastian Siewior wrote: > * Dave Chinner | 2008-07-11 18:42:49 [+1000]: > > >Oh - you must be running a debug XFS. CONFIG_XFS_DEBUG was only > >introduced in 2.6.26-rc1 and defaults to 'N', so you must have > >selected the non-default option when prompted. This will cause your > >machine to oops at the slightest inconsistency that is found, > >regardless of whether it is fatal or not. Like the help text says, > >don't set this unless you are an XFS developer.... > Could you please add this to the Kconfig entry. I effectively quoted from it: config XFS_DEBUG bool "XFS Debugging support (EXPERIMENTAL)" depends on XFS_FS && EXPERIMENTAL help Say Y here to get an XFS build with many debugging features, including ASSERT checks, function wrappers around macros, and extra sanity-checking functions in various code paths. Note that the resulting code will be HUGE and SLOW, and probably not useful unless you are debugging a particular problem. Say N unless you are an XFS developer, or you play one on TV. > Debug mode is usually > noisy, little slower and mostly usefull just to the developers but *I* > would not expect to BUG() in the non-fatal case. What do you expect debug code to do? Asserts are designed to drop the machine into a debugger when they fail so the problem can be, well, debugged. > Not sure but if this is just for hch and you than a define in xfs.h > might be safer :) And any other XFS developer using the XFS git tree or mainline, as tends to happen these days. And there are cases where a debug XFS might be needed to help find a problem that is being hit out in the field. Like all other debug config options, don't set them unless you know what you are doing.... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com