From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id n0K9cpnK001537 for ; Tue, 20 Jan 2009 03:38:53 -0600 Received: from mail-fx0-f32.google.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 6F166A0637 for ; Tue, 20 Jan 2009 01:38:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-fx0-f32.google.com (mail-fx0-f32.google.com [209.85.220.32]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id r5vQg1aN3vCxAQW0 for ; Tue, 20 Jan 2009 01:38:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by fxm13 with SMTP id 13so759373fxm.20 for ; Tue, 20 Jan 2009 01:38:48 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <497598BF.9080704@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 10:26:23 +0100 From: Jacek Luczak MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [XFS] 2.6.29-rc2: XFS internal error XFS_WANT_CORRUPTED_GOTO References: <497468C1.3000001@gmail.com> <4974CA20.6050308@sandeen.net> <20090120004611.GA6445@disturbed> 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 Dave Chinner pisze: > 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. > Yep, 32-bits here. I've googled a while looking for some answer and it looks like it has happen before in various kernel version (no report regarding 2.6.29 AFAIR). -Jacek _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs