From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.4 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FC33C433ED for ; Wed, 19 May 2021 21:02:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44D95611AB for ; Wed, 19 May 2021 21:02:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229755AbhESVD0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 May 2021 17:03:26 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:36370 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229693AbhESVD0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 May 2021 17:03:26 -0400 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 304106100C; Wed, 19 May 2021 21:02:06 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1621458126; bh=UPnlVMmF6GD5WYLq8Ll3rVWyXY3snGfmsjLWwtLkqVE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:From; b=YTvrZAAKv9f059p1vG/HMTdxo7YAytEjZX3Bri5X8hufXkr2W2nzI5RGjaVEcw0D6 aJSn8to4MRsILrmWDWPrUOpzY7kEcr6M6bFDdaYg140rhERitq/3vqozcY6nZaKqAp tUo5pdnCa7cl17QeDbASgmrvwZkzYpK/pFAjnmM9RWCJK3hfNDaoNSEZ6OgqseGQFc DrDE3gFmMRZjT0o420M5MDK5foAwozWenhzszrQ6UeXhkV+NcZ7e4t2ncXuTxotPIV kgf1i2bcrkTwpiqP83+lncnwvTidoOwdkQK3eVN2zOuwWKiTddNOML46DYHbU0dH72 9KWU4Nd2AwFIQ== Date: Wed, 19 May 2021 14:02:05 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: xfs Cc: Dave Chinner , hsiangkao@aol.com Subject: regressions in xfs/168? Message-ID: <20210519210205.GT9675@magnolia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Hm. Does anyone /else/ see failures with the new test xfs/168 (the fs shrink tests) on a 1k blocksize? It looks as though we shrink the AG so small that we trip the assert at the end of xfs_ag_resv_init that checks that the reservations for an AG don't exceed the free space in that AG, but tripping that doesn't return any error code, so xfs_ag_shrink_space commits the new fs size and presses on with even more shrinking until we've depleted AG 1 so thoroughly that the fs won't mount anymore. At a bare minimum we probably need to check the same thing the assert does and bail out of the shrink; or maybe we just need to create a function to adjust an AG's reservation to make that function less complicated. --D FSTYP -- xfs (debug) PLATFORM -- Linux/x86_64 flax-mtr00 5.13.0-rc2-xfsx #rc2 SMP PREEMPT Mon May 17 15:26:13 PDT 2021 MKFS_OPTIONS -- -f -b size=1024, /dev/sdf MOUNT_OPTIONS -- -o usrquota,grpquota,prjquota, /dev/sdf /opt xfs/168 Message from syslogd@flax-mtr00 at May 19 13:50:05 ... kernel:[ 9688.703923] XFS: Assertion failed: xfs_perag_resv(pag, XFS_AG_RESV_METADATA)->ar_reserved + xfs_perag_resv(pag, XFS_AG_RESV_RMAPBT)->ar_reserved <= pag->pagf_freeblks + pag->pagf_flcount, file: fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_ag_resv.c, line: 332 Message from syslogd@flax-mtr00 at May 19 13:50:06 ... kernel:[ 9689.186021] XFS: Assertion failed: xfs_perag_resv(pag, XFS_AG_RESV_METADATA)->ar_reserved + xfs_perag_resv(pag, XFS_AG_RESV_RMAPBT)->ar_reserved <= pag->pagf_freeblks + pag->pagf_flcount, file: fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_ag_resv.c, line: 332 Message from syslogd@flax-mtr00 at May 19 13:50:07 ... kernel:[ 9690.313532] XFS: Assertion failed: xfs_perag_resv(pag, XFS_AG_RESV_METADATA)->ar_reserved + xfs_perag_resv(pag, XFS_AG_RESV_RMAPBT)->ar_reserved <= pag->pagf_freeblks + pag->pagf_flcount, file: fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_ag_resv.c, line: 332 Message from syslogd@flax-mtr00 at May 19 13:50:07 ... kernel:[ 9690.359752] XFS: Assertion failed: xfs_perag_resv(pag, XFS_AG_RESV_METADATA)->ar_reserved + xfs_perag_resv(pag, XFS_AG_RESV_RMAPBT)->ar_reserved <= pag->pagf_freeblks + pag->pagf_flcount, file: fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_ag_resv.c, line: 332 Message from syslogd@flax-mtr00 at May 19 13:50:07 ... kernel:[ 9690.406718] XFS: Assertion failed: xfs_perag_resv(pag, XFS_AG_RESV_METADATA)->ar_reserved + xfs_perag_resv(pag, XFS_AG_RESV_RMAPBT)->ar_reserved <= pag->pagf_freeblks + pag->pagf_flcount, file: fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_ag_resv.c, line: 332 Message from syslogd@flax-mtr00 at May 19 13:50:07 ... kernel:[ 9690.977567] XFS: Assertion failed: xfs_perag_resv(pag, XFS_AG_RESV_METADATA)->ar_reserved + xfs_perag_resv(pag, XFS_AG_RESV_RMAPBT)->ar_reserved <= pag->pagf_freeblks + pag->pagf_flcount, file: fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_ag_resv.c, line: 332 [failed, exit status 1]- output mismatch (see /var/tmp/fstests/xfs/168.out.bad) --- tests/xfs/168.out 2021-05-16 18:48:31.290361859 -0700 +++ /var/tmp/fstests/xfs/168.out.bad 2021-05-19 13:50:09.520067445 -0700 @@ -1,2 +1,3 @@ QA output created by 168 -Silence is golden +xfs_repair failed with shrinking 748457 +(see /var/tmp/fstests/xfs/168.full for details) ... (Run 'diff -u /tmp/fstests/tests/xfs/168.out /var/tmp/fstests/xfs/168.out.bad' to see the entire diff) Ran: xfs/168 Failures: xfs/168 Failed 1 of 1 tests Test xfs/168 FAILED with code 1 and bad golden output: --- /tmp/fstests/tests/xfs/168.out 2021-05-16 18:48:31.290361859 -0700 +++ /var/tmp/fstests/xfs/168.out.bad 2021-05-19 13:50:09.520067445 -0700 @@ -1,2 +1,3 @@ QA output created by 168 -Silence is golden +xfs_repair failed with shrinking 748457 +(see /var/tmp/fstests/xfs/168.full for details) --D