From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id n0GJlEYq029229 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 13:47:15 -0600 Received: from ngcobalt07.manitu.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 93C499662E for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 11:47:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from ngcobalt07.manitu.net (ngcobalt07.manitu.net [217.11.48.107]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id shJkN4jSHDf7Ih89 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 11:47:12 -0800 (PST) From: Roland Eggner Subject: Re: xfs regression in linux_2.6.28, "XFS_WANT_CORRUPTED_GOTO at line 3327 of file fs/xfs/xfs_btree.c" Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 10:08:01 +0100 References: <200901150402.39801.edvx1@systemanalysen.net> <20090115221438.GF8071@disturbed> In-Reply-To: <20090115221438.GF8071@disturbed> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200901161008.02387.edvx1@systemanalysen.net> Reply-To: Roland Eggner List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: SGI Project XFS mailing list On Thursday Jan 15th 2009 at 23:14:38 Dave Chinner wrote: > On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 04:02:39AM +0100, Roland Eggner wrote: > > Latest (so far) working linux_2.6.27.9 > > linux_2.6.28 seems to introduce a xfs regression: > > You mean 2.6.29, don't you (i.e. a current TOT development kernel, > not a stable kernel)? I meant exactly what I have written: linux_2.6.28 > We have received a few reports of that since 2.6.29-git2 after the > big XFS merge occurred. Can you confirm that you are running a very > recent unstable kernel and not a stable 2.6.28 kernel? all 2.6.28 builds which I have tried so far are broken, today tried linux_2.6.29-rc1 and got the same "XFS_WANT_CORRUPTED_GOTO .." note: SAME failure with linux_2.6.28 linux_2.6.28-git7 linux_2.6.28-git9 linux_2.6.29-rc1 Should I compile with CONFIG_XFS_DEBUG? If you know a 2.6.28 or 2.6.29 kernel with REALLY stable xfs: please point me :-) > BTW, I note your kernel is tainted (like a couple of other > reports of this problem). Can you tell us what module you are > running that taints the kernel so we can correlate that with > other reports of the problem? kernels vanilla from kernel.org + NVIDIA-Linux-x86-96.43.09 graphics driver + from loop-aes-source the kernel-2.6.27 patch + following patch required because of the new credentials framework --- drivers/block/loop.c.orig 2009-01-11 00:55:28.000000000 +0100 +++ drivers/block/loop.c 2009-01-11 01:07:44.525441742 +0100 @@ -423,7 +423,7 @@ unsigned char b[64]; } un; - if(lo->lo_key_owner != current->uid && !capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN)) + if(lo->lo_key_owner != current_uid() && !capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN)) return -EPERM; m = (AESmultiKey *)lo->key_data; @@ -2360,7 +2360,7 @@ int err; struct loop_func_table *xfer = NULL; - if (lo->lo_encrypt_key_size && lo->lo_key_owner != current->uid && + if (lo->lo_encrypt_key_size && lo->lo_key_owner != current_uid() && !capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN)) return -EPERM; if ((unsigned int) info->lo_encrypt_key_size > LO_KEY_SIZE) @@ -2416,7 +2416,7 @@ if (info->lo_encrypt_key_size) { memcpy(lo->lo_encrypt_key, info->lo_encrypt_key, info->lo_encrypt_key_size); - lo->lo_key_owner = current->uid; + lo->lo_key_owner = current_uid(); } lo->lo_queue->make_request_fn = loop_make_request_real; I believe problem is xfs related, because only xfs partitions with write activity are affected, and the first error line in kernel log was in EVERY case "XFS_WANT_CORRUPTED_GOTO ..". It seems that the loop module does not matter, because both plane xfs partitions and encrypted xfs partitions are similarly affected. Cheers Roland _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs