Possible XFS Corruption

Possible XFS Corruption

[Callan Tham]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1849 bytes --]

Hi list,

I'm running a Gentoo-patched 2.6.7 kernel, and am experiencing possible
XFS corruption on one of my partitions. I've included a sample of the
logs I've managed to see here:

Filesystem "hda1": XFS internal error xfs_da_do_buf(2) at line 2273 of
file fs/xfs/xfs_da_btree.c.  Caller 0xc02420ec
[<c0241b2f>] xfs_da_do_buf+0x41f/0x960
[<c02420ec>] xfs_da_read_buf+0x3c/0x40
[<c02420ec>] xfs_da_read_buf+0x3c/0x40
[<c02420ec>] xfs_da_read_buf+0x3c/0x40
[<c0249611>] xfs_dir2_leaf_lookup_int+0x41/0x280
[<c0249611>] xfs_dir2_leaf_lookup_int+0x41/0x280
[<c0132a80>] do_generic_mapping_read+0x180/0x3a0
[<c02340e9>] xfs_bmap_last_offset+0xa9/0x120
[<c0249540>] xfs_dir2_leaf_lookup+0x20/0xb0
[<c02441f2>] xfs_dir2_lookup+0x112/0x130
[<c0132ca0>] file_read_actor+0x0/0xe0
[<c0283687>] xfs_read+0x197/0x250
[<c02736dc>] xfs_dir_lookup_int+0x2c/0xe0
[<c02781e7>] xfs_lookup+0x37/0x70
[<c0282aaa>] linvfs_lookup+0x4a/0x90
[<c015700f>] real_lookup+0xaf/0xd0
[<c0157218>] do_lookup+0x68/0x80
[<c0157628>] link_path_walk+0x3f8/0x7d0
[<c0157c06>] path_lookup+0x66/0x110
[<c015489f>] open_exec+0x1f/0xe0
[<c015499c>] kernel_read+0x3c/0x50
[<c016f8cf>] load_elf_binary+0xaef/0xb70
[<c011bd3d>] mm_init+0x8d/0xc0
[<c0135d52>] buffered_rmqueue+0xd2/0x180
[<c0135ead>] __alloc_pages+0xad/0x340
[<c013605b>] __alloc_pages+0x25b/0x340
[<c0291628>] __copy_from_user_ll+0x58/0x60
[<c0155411>] search_binary_handler+0x51/0x1a0
[<c015570b>] do_execve+0x1ab/0x230
[<c01049de>] sys_execve+0x2e/0x60
[<c0105d07>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb

This is not the first time I have seen this error, and am wondering if
it is something anyone has experienced regularly. Any help in diagnosing
this problem is greatly appreciated.

Please CC me any replies, as I'm not subscribed to the list at this
address. Thanks in advance!

Callan

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: Possible XFS Corruption

[Nathan Scott]

On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 11:49:05AM +0800, Callan Tham wrote:
> Hi list,
> 
> I'm running a Gentoo-patched 2.6.7 kernel, and am experiencing possible
> XFS corruption on one of my partitions. I've included a sample of the

Is it reproducible with an unpatched kernel.org kernel?

thanks.

-- 
Nathan

Re: Possible XFS Corruption

[Callan Tham]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 541 bytes --]

On Mon, 2004-08-02 at 13:02, Nathan Scott wrote:
> > I'm running a Gentoo-patched 2.6.7 kernel, and am experiencing possible
> > XFS corruption on one of my partitions. I've included a sample of the
> 
> Is it reproducible with an unpatched kernel.org kernel?
> 
> thanks.

Hi Nathan,

Unfortunately, I am unable to test this with a vanilla kernel. However,
looking through the Gentoo patches, they did not touch any of the XFS
code in a vanilla 2.6.7 kernel.

Is there any other way to diagnose this?

Thank you,

Callan

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: Possible XFS Corruption

[Nathan Scott]

On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 12:20:14PM +0800, Callan Tham wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-08-02 at 13:02, Nathan Scott wrote:
> > > I'm running a Gentoo-patched 2.6.7 kernel, and am experiencing possible
> > > XFS corruption on one of my partitions. I've included a sample of the
> > 
> > Is it reproducible with an unpatched kernel.org kernel?
> > 
> > thanks.
> 
> Hi Nathan,
> 
> Unfortunately, I am unable to test this with a vanilla kernel. However,

Oh?

> looking through the Gentoo patches, they did not touch any of the XFS
> code in a vanilla 2.6.7 kernel.

I would be surprised if they had.  A more likely source of
problems would be changes in the VM subsystem (XFS metadata
buffers are cached in the page cache).

> Is there any other way to diagnose this?

The failure you see is XFS reporting corruption in a directory
btree buffer which didn't have an appropriate magic number at
its start when read in from disk.  There's thousands of potential
reasons why that may have happened;  more often than not these
days its an error thats occured outside of XFS though, and XFS
is passing on the bad news.

If you can find a reproducible test case, you're half way there.
If you can find a reproducible test case on a kernel.org kernel,
you're 95% of the way there, cos then we can more easily help. ;)

cheers.

-- 
Nathan