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 (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA6DA29E05 for ; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 09:58:00 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A4B4AC002 for ; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 07:57:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 2oQ3wRV1dhFwCm5K (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 07:57:54 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 10:57:52 -0500 From: Brian Foster Subject: Re: XFS: false "torn write" errors (preventing mount) Message-ID: <20160229155752.GB47880@bfoster.bfoster> References: <56D471E002000078000D76C2@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <56D471E002000078000D76C2@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> 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 Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Jan Beulich Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 08:29:20AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote: > Brian, > > on a system where I routinely run both a 32-bit and a 64-bit x86 > kernel (underneath the same 32-bit distro) I'm observing the > newly added message being issued, along with the mounts > subsequently failing when running the 32-bit kernel. Without > doing anything to the FS, running an older 32-bit kernel or a > 4.5-rc6 64-bit one have everything work fine (and silently), so > I can only assume the detection logic doesn't work right in a > 32-bit kernel. I've looked over commits 6528250b71 and > 7088c4136f without being able to spot any obvious word size > dependency, but then again I know nothing about the inner > workings of the XFS code. > > I'm now hoping that you have an idea what's going on here. > There was one follow on fix related to byte order: 8e0bd4925bf6 ("xfs: fix endianness error when checking log block crc on big endian platforms"), but I don't think that would have any effect on an x86 kernel. Is the 32-bit kernel problematic on its own, or must the 64-bit kernel be involved somehow before the 32-bit kernel reproduces a problem? For example, can you mkfs, mount and remount (perhaps multiple times) on the 32-bit kernel without a problem? If so, what happens if you transition to the 64-bit kernel, remount a few times, and then go back to 32-bit? In general, anything that narrows down the reproducer is helpful. I don't appear to have a 32-bit env. handy so I'll kick off an install in the meantime and take a closer look from there... Brian > Thanks, Jan > > _______________________________________________ > xfs mailing list > xfs@oss.sgi.com > http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs