public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Angelo Dureghello <angelo.dureghello@nomovok.com>
To: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: xfstests, bad generic tests 009 and 308
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 11:15:28 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56026DB0.8070104@nomovok.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150922212740.GJ19114@dastard>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2888 bytes --]

Hi Dave,

many thanks.

On 22/09/2015 23:27, Dave Chinner wrote:
> Urk, the command should be "fsync", not "sync". Regardless, the
> last bmap/fiemap pair shows something interesting:
>
> bmap-vp:
>
>> /media/p6/testfile:
>>   EXT: FILE-OFFSET      BLOCK-RANGE      AG AG-OFFSET        TOTAL FLAGS
>>     0: [0..127]:        96..223           0 (96..223)          128 00000
>>     1: [128..2047]:     hole                                  1920
>>     2: [2048..2559]:    2144..2655        0 (2144..2655)       512 10000
> fiemap -v:
>
>> /media/p6/testfile:
>>   EXT: FILE-OFFSET      BLOCK-RANGE      TOTAL FLAGS
>>     0: [0..127]:        96..223            128   0x0
>>     1: [128..2047]:     hole              1920
>>     2: [2048..2175]:    2144..2271         128 0x800
>>     3: [2176..2303]:    2272..2399         128   0x0
>>     4: [2304..2559]:    2400..2655         256 0x801
> Note that they are different - the former shows an unwritten extent
> of 256k @ offset 1MB, the later shows that extent split by 64k of
> data @ 1088k.
>
> The bmap -vp output is incorrect - it is supposed to sync data first
> and so should look the same as the fiemap output. Can you run this
> test again, this time with s/sync/fsync so the files are clean when
> bmap/fiemap are run? Can you run it a second time (umount/mkfs
> again) but with fiemap run first? i.e '-c "fiemap -v" -c "bmap -vp" \'
> instead of the original order?
>
> Next, can you compile your kernel with CONFIG_XFS_DEBUG=y and rerun
> the tests? Does anything interesting appear in dmesg during the test
> run?

Done, see mkfs_output_2.txt attached

> Not actually useful - I need to know what is happening inside the
> unlinkat() call.  I'm going to need a trace-cmd event dump of that
> xfs_io command and the subsequent rm (at least for the first couple
> of seconds of the rm). Please put the output file from the trace-cmd
> record command on a tmpfs filesystem so it doesn't pollute the xfs
> event trace ;)
>
I set some traces inside fs/namei.c  do_unlinkat()

root[243] vpc24 (master) /home/angelo/xfstests
# ./start_xfs_test.sh
QA output created by 308
[  144.822616] XFS (mmcblk0p5): Mounting V4 Filesystem
[  145.074537] XFS (mmcblk0p5): Starting recovery (logdev: internal)
[  145.107298] XFS (mmcblk0p5): Ending recovery (logdev: internal)
Silence is golden
[  145.413606] do_unlinkat(): entering
[  145.417124] do_unlinkat(): retry
[  145.421156] do_unlinkat(): retry_delegate
[  145.425920] do_unlinkat(): vfs_unlink returns 0
[  145.430950] do_unlinkat(): exit2

At least that function "seems" to complete, but, as from my previous 
message
looks like strace was not showing nothig over it.

I captured about 10 seconds of events after the "hang" on 308. Hope they 
are
enough.

File is quite long, so you can read it from here:
http://sysam.it/~angelo/events.txt

bye,

-- 
Best regards,
Angelo Dureghello


[-- Attachment #2: mkfs_output_2.txt --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 4048 bytes --]

# # xfs_io -f -c "pwrite 0 64k" -c fsync \
	    -c "bmap -vp" -c "fiemap -v" \
	    -c "falloc 1024k 256k" -c fsync \
	    -c "pwrite 1088k 64k" -c fsync \
	    -c "bmap -vp" -c "fiemap -v" \
	    /media/p6/testfile


# xfs_io -f -c "pwrite 0 64k" -c fsync \
>     -c "bmap -vp" -c "fiemap -v" \
>     -c "falloc 1024k 256k" -c fsync \
>     -c "pwrite 1088k 64k" -c fsync \
>     -c "bmap -vp" -c "fiemap -v" \
>     /media/p6/testfile
wrote 65536/65536 bytes at offset 0
64 KiB, 16 ops; 0.0000 sec (10.271 MiB/sec and 2629.4166 ops/sec)
/media/p6/testfile:
 EXT: FILE-OFFSET      BLOCK-RANGE      AG AG-OFFSET        TOTAL FLAGS
   0: [0..127]:        96..223           0 (96..223)          128 00000
/media/p6/testfile:
 EXT: FILE-OFFSET      BLOCK-RANGE      TOTAL FLAGS
   0: [0..127]:        96..223            128   0x1
wrote 65536/65536 bytes at offset 1114112
64 KiB, 16 ops; 0.0000 sec (11.857 MiB/sec and 3035.4771 ops/sec)
/media/p6/testfile:
 EXT: FILE-OFFSET      BLOCK-RANGE      AG AG-OFFSET        TOTAL FLAGS
   0: [0..127]:        96..223           0 (96..223)          128 00000
   1: [128..2047]:     hole                                  1920
   2: [2048..2175]:    2144..2271        0 (2144..2271)       128 10000
   3: [2176..2303]:    2272..2399        0 (2272..2399)       128 00000
   4: [2304..2559]:    2400..2655        0 (2400..2655)       256 10000
/media/p6/testfile:
 EXT: FILE-OFFSET      BLOCK-RANGE      TOTAL FLAGS
   0: [0..127]:        96..223            128   0x0
   1: [128..2047]:     hole              1920
   2: [2048..2175]:    2144..2271         128 0x800
   3: [2176..2303]:    2272..2399         128   0x0
   4: [2304..2559]:    2400..2655         256 0x801


root[251] host ~
# mkfs.xfs -f /dev/mmcblk0p6 
meta-data=/dev/mmcblk0p6         isize=256    agcount=4, agsize=551008 blks
         =                       sectsz=512   attr=2, projid32bit=1
         =                       crc=0        finobt=0
data     =                       bsize=4096   blocks=2204032, imaxpct=25
         =                       sunit=0      swidth=0 blks
naming   =version 2              bsize=4096   ascii-ci=0 ftype=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
root[252] host ~
# mount /dev/mmcblk0p6 /media/p6
[ 1000.531021] XFS (mmcblk0p6): Mounting V4 Filesystem
[ 1000.813339] XFS (mmcblk0p6): Ending clean mount
root[253] host ~
# xfs_io -f -c "pwrite 0 64k" -c fsync \
>      -c "bmap -vp" -c "fiemap -v" \
>      -c "falloc 1024k 256k" -c fsync \
>      -c "pwrite 1088k 64k" -c fsync \
>      -c "fiemap -v" -c "bmap -vp" \
>      /media/p6/testfile
wrote 65536/65536 bytes at offset 0
64 KiB, 16 ops; 0.0000 sec (10.126 MiB/sec and 2592.3526 ops/sec)
/media/p6/testfile:
 EXT: FILE-OFFSET      BLOCK-RANGE      AG AG-OFFSET        TOTAL FLAGS
   0: [0..127]:        96..223           0 (96..223)          128 00000
/media/p6/testfile:
 EXT: FILE-OFFSET      BLOCK-RANGE      TOTAL FLAGS
   0: [0..127]:        96..223            128   0x1
wrote 65536/65536 bytes at offset 1114112
64 KiB, 16 ops; 0.0000 sec (11.519 MiB/sec and 2948.7652 ops/sec)
/media/p6/testfile:
 EXT: FILE-OFFSET      BLOCK-RANGE      TOTAL FLAGS
   0: [0..127]:        96..223            128   0x0
   1: [128..2047]:     hole              1920
   2: [2048..2175]:    2144..2271         128 0x800
   3: [2176..2303]:    2272..2399         128   0x0
   4: [2304..2559]:    2400..2655         256 0x801
/media/p6/testfile:
 EXT: FILE-OFFSET      BLOCK-RANGE      AG AG-OFFSET        TOTAL FLAGS
   0: [0..127]:        96..223           0 (96..223)          128 00000
   1: [128..2047]:     hole                                  1920
   2: [2048..2175]:    2144..2271        0 (2144..2271)       128 10000
   3: [2176..2303]:    2272..2399        0 (2272..2399)       128 00000
   4: [2304..2559]:    2400..2655        0 (2400..2655)       256 10000
root[254] host ~


[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 121 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

  reply	other threads:[~2015-09-23  9:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-09-18 16:38 xfstests, bad generic tests 009 and 308 Angelo Dureghello
2015-09-18 22:44 ` Dave Chinner
2015-09-21 11:13   ` Angelo Dureghello
2015-09-21 11:18     ` Angelo Dureghello
2015-09-21 22:52     ` Dave Chinner
2015-09-22 12:41       ` Angelo Dureghello
2015-09-22 21:27         ` Dave Chinner
2015-09-23  9:15           ` Angelo Dureghello [this message]
2015-09-23 22:25             ` Dave Chinner
2015-09-23 10:43       ` Yann Dupont - Veille Techno
2015-09-23 22:04         ` Dave Chinner
2015-09-24  8:20           ` Yann Dupont - Veille Techno
2015-09-27  0:40             ` Angelo Dureghello
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2015-09-18 16:16 angelo

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=56026DB0.8070104@nomovok.com \
    --to=angelo.dureghello@nomovok.com \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox