From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Tue, 28 Oct 2008 20:29:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.168.29]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m9T3Th7H032364 for ; Tue, 28 Oct 2008 20:29:43 -0700 Received: from ipmail01.adl6.internode.on.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 1FAC7556939 for ; Tue, 28 Oct 2008 20:29:43 -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 2AMMbTBbySg9VJ8m for ; Tue, 28 Oct 2008 20:29:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 14:29:41 +1100 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: assertion failure with latest xfs Message-ID: <20081029032941.GG4985@disturbed> References: <49003EFF.4090404@sgi.com> <20081023173149.GA30316@infradead.org> <20081023222126.GA18495@disturbed> <4907B1B3.4020008@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4907B1B3.4020008@sgi.com> Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Lachlan McIlroy Cc: Christoph Hellwig , xfs-oss On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 11:43:31AM +1100, Lachlan McIlroy wrote: > Dave Chinner wrote: >> Hmmmm - there's also another bug in xfs_iget_cache_hit() - we don't >> drop the reference we got if we found an unlinked inode after the >> igrab() (the ENOENT case). I'll fix that as well. >> >> Patch below that I'm currently running through xfsqa. > > I gave this patch a go and it still asserted at the same place running > the same test. Can you put more inode trace points in so that we can see where the extra reference is coming from? Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com