From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id q9VH7ovY221699 for ; Wed, 31 Oct 2012 12:07:50 -0500 Message-ID: <50915B51.3050309@sgi.com> Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 12:09:37 -0500 From: Mark Tinguely MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: fix buffer shudown reference count mismatch References: <1351556454-29723-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> In-Reply-To: <1351556454-29723-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Dave Chinner Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On 10/29/12 19:20, Dave Chinner wrote: > From: Dave Chinner > > When we shut down the filesystem, we have to unpin and free all the > buffers currently active in the CIL. To do this we unpin and remove > them in one operation as a result of a failed iclogbuf write. For > buffers, we do this removal via a simultated IO completion of after > marking the buffer stale. > > At the time we do this, we have two references to the buffer - the > active LRU reference and the buf log item. The LRU reference is > removed by marking the buffer stale, and the active CIL reference is > by the xfs_buf_iodone() callback that is run by > xfs_buf_do_callbacks() during ioend processing (via the bp->b_iodone > callback). > > However, ioend processing requires one more reference - that of the > IO that it is completing. We don't have this reference, so we free > the buffer prematurely and use it after it is freed. This leads to > assert failures in xfs_buf_rele() on debug kernels because the > b_hold count is zero. > > Fix this by making sure we take the necessary IO reference before > starting IO completion processing on the stale buffer. > > Cc: > Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner This seems to take care of one of the ASSERT that I experienced after the worker move series. With this patch applied, there is a new ASSERT that the perag is not empty in filesystem unmount in test 179. I think this is related to the worker move series and not this patch. I will send the information in a different thread. Reviewed-by: Mark Tinguely _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs