From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753925Ab0JCPSI (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Oct 2010 11:18:08 -0400 Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:46399 "EHLO hera.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751328Ab0JCPSH (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Oct 2010 11:18:07 -0400 Message-ID: <4CA89E63.4080907@kernel.org> Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2010 17:16:51 +0200 From: Tejun Heo User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100915 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Ted Ts'o" , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Kernel Testers List , Maciej Rutecki , Florian Mickler , Cesar Eduardo Barros , Jens Axboe , Jan Kara Subject: Re: [Bug #19062] Dirtiable inode bdi default != sb bdi btrfs References: <20101002165433.GL21129@thunk.org> <201010022358.35972.rjw@sisk.pl> <20101003022707.GN21129@thunk.org> In-Reply-To: <20101003022707.GN21129@thunk.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.3 (hera.kernel.org [127.0.0.1]); Sun, 03 Oct 2010 15:17:27 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org (cc'in Jan and quoting the whole body for him) Jan, any chance this is caused by the recent bdi change? On 10/03/2010 04:27 AM, Ted Ts'o wrote: > On Sat, Oct 02, 2010 at 11:58:35PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Saturday, October 02, 2010, Ted Ts'o wrote: >>> On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 10:04:15PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>>> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions >>>> from 2.6.35. Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team >>>> know (either way). >>>> >>>> >>>> Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19062 >>>> Subject : Dirtiable inode bdi default != sb bdi btrfs >>>> Submitter : Cesar Eduardo Barros >>>> Date : 2010-09-23 0:54 (4 days old) >>>> Message-ID : <4C9AA546.6050201@cesarb.net> >>>> References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=128520328929595&w=2 >>> >>> Note: I'm seeing this warning (Dirtiable inode bdi default != sb bdi) >>> when I moved from 2.6.36-rc3 to 2.6.36-rc6, using ext4 as a root >>> partition, and running mke2fs and e2fsck on ext2, ext3, and ext4 file >>> systems. So I'm seeing this as a known regression from rc3 to rc6. >>> Maybe it's different bug with ext4, but in any case, it's highly >>> annoying. >> >> Thanks for the info. I wonder who should see this report. > > Oops, correction, the correct warning that I'm seeing is: > > Dirtiable inode bdi block != sb bdi block > ^^^^^ ^^^^^ > > ------------[ cut here ]------------ > WARNING: at /usr/projects/linux/ext4/fs/fs-writeback.c:87 inode_to_bdi+0x4e/0x5c() > Hardware name: > Dirtiable inode bdi block != sb bdi block > Modules linked in: > Pid: 21649, comm: mkfs.ext4 Tainted: G W 2.6.36-rc6-00016-gcc25699 #735 > Call Trace: > [] warn_slowpath_common+0x6a/0x7f > [] ? inode_to_bdi+0x4e/0x5c > [] warn_slowpath_fmt+0x2b/0x2f > [] inode_to_bdi+0x4e/0x5c > [] __mark_inode_dirty+0xaf/0x162 > [] file_update_time+0xcc/0xe9 > [] __generic_file_aio_write+0x136/0x28f > [] blkdev_aio_write+0x33/0x72 > [] do_sync_write+0x8f/0xca > [] ? mutex_unlock+0xd/0xf > [] ? security_file_permission+0x27/0x2b > [] ? rw_verify_area+0x9d/0xc0 > [] ? do_sync_write+0x0/0xca > [] vfs_write+0x85/0xe3 > [] sys_write+0x40/0x62 > [] syscall_call+0x7/0xb > ---[ end trace 1f39401760ab3a42 ]--- -- tejun