Hi Dave,

many thanks for the support. Sorry for the double mail, after
first registering mails was not accepted, so i re-registered
with a company mail.


On 19/09/2015 00:44, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 06:38:38PM +0200, Angelo Dureghello wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> working on arm (32bit arch), kernel 4.1.6.
> Is this a new platform?
>
> Also, we need to know what compiler you are using, because we know
> that certain versions of gcc miscompile XFS kernel code on arm
> (4.6, 4.7 and certain versions of 4.8 are suspect) due to a
> combination of compiler mis-optimisations and kernel bugs in the
> arm 64 bit division asm implementation.
>
> As such, it would be worthwhile trying gcc-4.9 and a 4.3-rc1 kernel
> to see if the problems still occur.

I am using actually gcc-linaro-4.9-2015.05-x86_64_arm-linux-gnueabihf

>> Looking to find the reason of some bad results on xfstests,
>>
>> -tests/generic/009
>> ------------------
>> i get several "all holes" messages
>>
>> generic/009    [  842.949643] run fstests generic/009 at 2015-09-18
>> 15:29:36
>>   - output mismatch (see
>> /home/angelo/xfstests/results//generic/009.out.bad)
>>      --- tests/generic/009.out    2015-09-17 10:54:06.689071257 +0000
>>      +++ /home/angelo/xfstests/results//generic/009.out.bad
>> 2015-09-18 15:29:41.412784177 +0000
>>      @@ -1,79 +1,45 @@
>>       QA output created by 009
>>           1. into a hole
>>      -0: [0..7]: hole
>>      -1: [8..23]: unwritten
>>      -2: [24..39]: hole
>>      +0: [0..39]: hole
>>       daa100df6e6711906b61c9ab5aa16032
>>
>> also some other tests are giving the same bad notices.
> Can you attach the entire
> /home/angelo/xfstests/results//generic/009.out.bad file? I'm not
> sure which of the tests this output comes from, so I need to
> confirm which specific operations are resulting in errors.
Sure, i completed the whole generic + shared + xfs tests.
In total i have 38 errors. And trying now one by one to understand the 
reason.
I attached the 009 output.

>> -tests/generic/308
>> ------------------
>>
>> I have now: CONFIG_LBDAF=y
>>
>> In my target device this test creates a 16 Terabytes file 308.tempfile
>>
>> -rw------- 1 root root  17592186044415 Sep 18 09:40 testfile.308
>>
>> While "df" is not complaining about:
>>
>> /dev/mmcblk0p5   8378368   45252   8333116   1% /media/p5
>>
>> and next rm -f on it hands the cpu to 95%, forever.
>>
>> This issue seems known from a long time, as it has been discussed in
>> the thread:
>>
>> http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2013-04/msg00273.html
>>
>> I was wondering if there was any special reason why the Jeff patch has
>> never been finally applied.
> MAX_LFS_FILESIZE on 32 bits is 8TB, whereas xfs supports 16TB file
> size on 32 bit systems. The specific issue this test fixed was
> committed in commit 8695d27 ("xfs: fix infinite loop at
> xfs_vm_writepage on 32bit system")
>
> http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2014-05/msg00447.html
>
> And, as you may notice now, generic/308 is the test case for the
> exact problem the above commit fixed.

I have recent git version of xfstests, but generic/308 shows

#! /bin/bash
# FS QA Test No. 308
#
# Regression test for commit:
# f17722f ext4: Fix max file size and logical block counting of extent 
format file

> Can you find out exactly where the CPU is looping? sysrq-l will
> help, as will running 'perf top -U -g' to show you the hot code
> paths, and so on.

Strangely, the patch 
http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2014-05/msg00447.html is already included
in the xfs that comes with this 4.1.6 kernel, while only applying previous

http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2013-04/msg00273.html patch from Jeff fix the issue and
test 308 get passed.


I have a 16MB partition, and wondering why xfs allows from test 308 to 
create a 16TB file.

-rw------- 1 root root  17592186044415 Sep 18 09:40 testfile.308


When at 308 test exit, rm is invoked, system get blocked in infinite loop.

root      5445  0.7  0.2   3760  3180 ttyS0    S+   10:53   0:00 
/bin/bash /home/angelo/xfstests/tests/generic/308
root      5674  100  0.0   1388   848 ttyS0    R+   10:53   0:27 rm -f 
/media/p5/testfile.308

Can't install actually perf-tools for some debian repos issue, but let 
me know, i will enable sysrq
if needed.

Best regards
Angelo


>
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.

-- 
Best regards,
Angelo Dureghello