From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id n0KBTipi007900 for ; Tue, 20 Jan 2009 05:29:46 -0600 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 51793D037CA for ; Tue, 20 Jan 2009 03:29:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [18.85.46.34]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 7IgodKUXaMnmRGQg for ; Tue, 20 Jan 2009 03:29:43 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 06:29:10 -0500 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [XFS] 2.6.29-rc2: XFS internal error XFS_WANT_CORRUPTED_GOTO Message-ID: <20090120112910.GA6831@infradead.org> References: <497468C1.3000001@gmail.com> <4974CA20.6050308@sandeen.net> <20090120004611.GA6445@disturbed> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090120004611.GA6445@disturbed> 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: Eric Sandeen , Jacek Luczak , LKML , hch@infradead.org, xfs mailing list On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:46:11AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 12:44:48PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > Jacek Luczak wrote: > > > Hi All, > > > > > > I've stepped into XFS issue/bug. Yesterday I've compiled 2.6.29-rc2 and no > > > didn't found errors. Today I've booted my notebook and XFS bug have occurred. > > > System reboot didn't helped, same error appeared. > > > > > > Some info: > > > [1] config: http://pin.if.uz.zgora.pl/~difrost/linux-next/2.6.29-rc2.config > > > [2] kernel logs: > > > http://pin.if.uz.zgora.pl/~difrost/linux-next/2.6.29-rc2_XFS-bug.log > > > [3] most interesting part of log below. > > > > so this happens every mount? Reproducible is good. How large is the > > filesystem (too large to extract elsewhere for analysis...?) (plus I > > suppose it'll be hard to get to it when you can't even boot....) > > XFS folks, I suspect the common link between all the reports of this > bug is that they are on 32-bit kernels. I can't reproduce this on > a 64 bit kernel, and I'm trying to get a 32-bit UML built right now > to test this theory. I'm doing about half of my testing on 32 bit x86, and I couldn't reproduce the detailed receipe in the kernel.org bugzilla yet. Just curious: do you have CONFIG_LBD set? _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs