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 5193C7F3F for ; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 03:04:23 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 416FE304059 for ; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 01:04:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx4-phx2.redhat.com (mx4-phx2.redhat.com [209.132.183.25]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id qhNylVaajHq9EH2Y for ; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 01:04:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 04:04:11 -0400 (EDT) From: CAI Qian Message-ID: <924669527.12643828.1363075451534.JavaMail.root@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20130312074608.GL21651@dastard> Subject: Re: 3.9-rc2 xfs panic MIME-Version: 1.0 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: Dave Chinner Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dave Chinner" > To: "CAI Qian" > Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com > Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 3:46:08 PM > Subject: Re: 3.9-rc2 xfs panic > > On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 02:34:07AM -0400, CAI Qian wrote: > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Dave Chinner" > > > To: "CAI Qian" > > > Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com > > > Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 2:07:01 PM > > > Subject: Re: 3.9-rc2 xfs panic > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 12:32:28AM -0400, CAI Qian wrote: > > > > Just came across when running xfstests using 3.9-rc2 kernel on > > > > a > > > > power7 > > > > box with addition of this patch which fixed a known issue, > > > > http://people.redhat.com/qcai/stable/01-fix-double-fetch-hlist.patch > > > > > > > > The log shows it was happened around test case 370 with > > > > TEST_PARAM_BLKSIZE = 2048 > > > > > > That doesn't sound like xfstests. it only has 305 tests, and no > > > parameters like TEST_PARAM_BLKSIZE.... > > Sorry, it is a typo, test case 270 not 370. TEST_PARAM_BLKSIZE was > > from an internal wrapper to be used to create new filessytem not > > from the > > original xfstests. > > OK, so that means you're testing 2k filesystem block size on a 64k > page size machine? Looks like so. Would that be a problem? TEST_PARAM_TEST_DEV not specified; using loopback file TEST_PARAM_SCRATCH_DEV not specified; using loopback file meta-data=/dev/loop0 isize=256 agcount=4, agsize=655360 blks = sectsz=512 attr=2, projid32bit=0 data = bsize=2048 blocks=2621440, imaxpct=25 = sunit=0 swidth=0 blks naming =version 2 bsize=4096 ascii-ci=0 log =internal log bsize=2048 blocks=5120, version=2 = sectsz=512 sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=1 realtime =none extsz=4096 blocks=0, rtextents=0 TEST_DEV=/dev/loop0 # device containing TEST PARTITION TEST_DIR=/mnt/testarea/test # mount point of TEST PARTITION SCRATCH_DEV=/dev/loop1 # device containing SCRATCH PARTITION SCRATCH_MNT=/mnt/testarea/scratch # mount point for SCRATCH PARTITION SCRATCH_LOGDEV= # optional external log for SCRATCH PARTITION SCRATCH_RTDEV= # optional realtime device for SCRATCH PARTITION TMPFS_MOUNT_OPTIONS="" # scratch mount options for tmpfs TEST_FS_MOUNT_OPTS="" # test mount options for tmpfs > Are you running with CONFIG_XFS_DEBUG=y? # CONFIG_XFS_DEBUG is not set I can enable this if I can reproduce it. > > > > So, looks like memory corruption - a corrupted slab, perhaps? Can > > > you turn on memory poisoning, debugging, etc? > > Does this turn anything up? It is still running. Unsure if it is reproducible at this point. CAI Qian > > Cheers, > > Dave. > -- > Dave Chinner > david@fromorbit.com > _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs