From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay2.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.29]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D6A07F37 for ; Thu, 6 Jun 2013 16:44:28 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EBE9304081 for ; Thu, 6 Jun 2013 14:44:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sandeen.net (sandeen.net [63.231.237.45]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id NloTTzVRdUhMSAix for ; Thu, 06 Jun 2013 14:44:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51B102B7.5070204@sandeen.net> Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2013 16:44:23 -0500 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] xfs: xfs_inactive fails to cleanup symlinks with attributes References: <20130606161032.753011157@sgi.com> <51B0E03B.3010303@sgi.com> <20130606211307.GB29338@dastard> <51B0FF1D.60402@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <51B0FF1D.60402@sgi.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: Mark Tinguely Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On 6/6/13 4:29 PM, Mark Tinguely wrote: > On 06/06/13 16:13, Dave Chinner wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 02:17:15PM -0500, Mark Tinguely wrote: >>> On 06/06/13 11:10, Mark Tinguely wrote: >>>> Found this bug testing extended attributes. >>>> >>>> # make a big symbolic link that is in the inode core and mostly fills it. >>>> # CRC enabled filesystem will use a 68 byte smaller link in the test. >>>> >>>> ln -s 1234567890/1234567890/1234567890/1234567890/1234567890/1234567890/1234567890/1234567890/1234567890/1234567890/1234567890/0123456/a a >>>> >>>> # the extended attribute will bump the symbolic link to a remote extent >>>> # I think only one of these attribute is needed, but they are so fun... >>>> attr -Rs 1234567890ad a< /dev/null >>>> attr -Rs 1234567890ae a< /dev/null >>>> attr -Rs 1234567890af a< /dev/null >>>> >>> >>> oops. the following steps are also needed - I took them out because I >>> thought they were unecessary: >>> >>> # remove the attributes: >>> attr -Rr 1234567890ad a >>> attr -Rr 1234567890ae a >>> attr -Rr 1234567890af a >>> >>> now we will assert >> >> I cannot reproduce this on a current TOT kernel with or without >> CRCs: >> >> # mkfs.xfs -f /dev/vdb >> meta-data=/dev/vdb isize=256 agcount=4, agsize=720896 blks >> = sectsz=512 attr=2, projid32bit=1 >> = crc=0 >> data = bsize=4096 blocks=2883584, imaxpct=25 >> = sunit=0 swidth=0 blks >> naming =version 2 bsize=4096 ascii-ci=0 >> log =internal log bsize=4096 blocks=2560, version=2 >> = sectsz=512 sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=1 >> realtime =none extsz=4096 blocks=0, rtextents=0 >> # mount /dev/vdb /mnt/scratch/ >> # cd /mnt/scratch/ >> # ln -s 1234567890/1234567890/1234567890/1234567890/1234567890/1234567890/1234567890/1234567890/1234567890/1234567890/1234567890/0123456/a a >> # attr -Rs 1234567890ad a< /dev/null >> Attribute "1234567890ad" set to a 0 byte value for a: >> >> # attr -Rs 1234567890ae a< /dev/null >> Attribute "1234567890ae" set to a 0 byte value for a: >> >> # attr -Rs 1234567890af a< /dev/null >> Attribute "1234567890af" set to a 0 byte value for a: >> >> # attr -Rr 1234567890ad a >> # attr -Rr 1234567890ae a >> # attr -Rr 1234567890af a >> # sync >> # cd ~ >> # umount /mnt/scratch >> # >> >> No assert. Can you write an xfstest that reproduces the problem and >> post the patch? >> >> Cheers, >> >> Dave. > > Yes, these instructions are for a *256* byte inode with top of tree code. > > A 512 byte inode will need a bigger link. The link must nearly fill the literal area. Patch has been supplied: > > http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2013-06/msg00110.html I think he meant a patch for xfstests ;) -Eric > --Mark. > > _______________________________________________ > 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