xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: 2.6.30 panic - xfs_fs_destroy_inode

To: Lachlan McIlroy <lmcilroy@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: 2.6.30 panic - xfs_fs_destroy_inode
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:13:05 -0400
Cc: Patrick Schreurs <patrick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, Tommy van Leeuwen <tommy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <1587994907.388291245745033392.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <4A408316.2070903@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1587994907.388291245745033392.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 04:17:13AM -0400, Lachlan McIlroy wrote:
> It looks to me like xfs_reclaim_inode() has returned EAGAIN because the
> XFS_RECLAIM flag was set on the xfs inode.  This implies we are trying
> to reclaim an inode that is already in the process of being reclaimed.
> I'm not sure how this happened but it could be a simple case of ignoring
> this error since the reclaim is already in progress.

Well, having the reclaim already in progress means we're racing here.
And I suspect this fits into the other bugs with possibly duplicat
inodes we see after the inode+xfs_inode unification.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>