From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id pATIlvpR089467 for ; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 12:47:57 -0600 Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 12:48:16 -0600 From: Ben Myers Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] [PATCH] xfs: fix attr2 vs large data fork assert Message-ID: <20111129184816.GV29840@sgi.com> References: <20111115201407.038216766@bombadil.infradead.org> <20111115201426.498870090@bombadil.infradead.org> <20111116231517.GA7046@dastard> <20111117073004.GB3733@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111117073004.GB3733@infradead.org> 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: Christoph Hellwig Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com Hey Christoph, On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 02:30:04AM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 10:15:17AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 03:14:08PM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > With Dmitry fsstress updates I've seen very reproducible crashes in > > > xfs_attr_shortform_remove because xfs_attr_shortform_bytesfit claims that > > > the attributes would not fit inline into the inode after removing an > > > attribute. It turns out that we were operating on an inode with lots > > > of delalloc extents, and thus an if_bytes values for the data fork that > > > is larger than biggest possible on-disk storage for it which utterly > > > confuses the code near the end of xfs_attr_shortform_bytesfit. > > > > We have a test that stresses allocated extents vs attributes in the > > xfs_fsr swapext test (227), but that does not take into account > > delalloc extents. It sounds like it would be relatively easy to > > write a regression test for this particular case - create a file > > with a bunch of attributes, then create a number of delalloc data > > extents, then remove the attributes to trigger the condition in > > xfs_attr_shortform_remove().... > > Test 117 with Dmitries new fsstress changes hit it 100% reliably > before > > xfstests: freeze fsstress options for 117'th > > I was planning on adding a copy of the test using an explicit > combination of fsstress seeds that reproduce the issue. FYI, Test 117 also hit it for me after I backed off 'freeze fsstress options'. Are you still planning on adding a copy of the test with the seeds in question? Thanks, Ben _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs