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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB9CAC433EF for ; Fri, 18 Mar 2022 21:51:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S241201AbiCRVw6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Mar 2022 17:52:58 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56468 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232636AbiCRVw6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Mar 2022 17:52:58 -0400 Received: from ams.source.kernel.org (ams.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:4601:e00::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9986F2335C3 for ; Fri, 18 Mar 2022 14:51:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ams.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49D8BB825D2 for ; Fri, 18 Mar 2022 21:51:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B4C2EC340E8; Fri, 18 Mar 2022 21:51:34 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1647640296; bh=4AQZY0UbXXOZSm2eOXuPxI8pf1ncTdYf28gh3+or49o=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=hyjJAtkfqgGbcH31gQtY71KmPpZU7ut2HJ6eunKeKyreoXtyl2838SWZ0VXGeG9A7 YrEPv9du2P4nwCpcM6nkBZUkJCaHga49QYnYA+KKSFeEPOcGt+ympPl6pqA6aFyjib 3zZdbVUT1Rh+VdJWBZHxTak5elO0jxBBZ8UfWvLAbcJ3oL1+BRQa6KZru/TF9cIeiR nPCI1KZbKuRISpQ9SHAYB2ZXRfBeAerEZEemiZA1g8HEEMFGS0oWNmg0z7WIX9qs+A aF/W7s1zvTgq1QAr6BckYlAp6YeelRGoHo8+r7mF/+mjiyHjHiSQFa5CKbh5FC/8Yj 5OvZRFg1pQmAw== Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2022 14:51:33 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: Dave Chinner Cc: Brian Foster , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [BUG] log I/O completion GPF via xfs/006 and xfs/264 on 5.17.0-rc8 Message-ID: <20220318215133.GG8224@magnolia> References: <20220318214831.GH1544202@dread.disaster.area> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220318214831.GH1544202@dread.disaster.area> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Mar 19, 2022 at 08:48:31AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 09:46:53AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm not sure if this is known and/or fixed already, but it didn't look > > familiar so here is a report. I hit a splat when testing Willy's > > prospective folio bookmark change and it turns out it replicates on > > Linus' current master (551acdc3c3d2). This initially reproduced on > > xfs/264 (mkfs defaults) and I saw a soft lockup warning variant via > > xfs/006, but when I attempted to reproduce the latter a second time I > > hit what looks like the same problem as xfs/264. Both tests seem to > > involve some form of error injection, so possibly the same underlying > > problem. The GPF splat from xfs/264 is below. > > On a side note, I'm wondering if we should add xfs/006 and xfs/264 > to the recoveryloop group - they do a shutdown under load and a > followup mount to ensure the filesystem gets recovered before > the test ends and the fs is checked, so while thy don't explicitly > test recovery, they do exercise it.... > > Thoughts? Someone else asked about this the other day, and I proposed a 'recovery' group for tests that don't run in a loop. --D > > -Dave. > -- > Dave Chinner > david@fromorbit.com