On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 12:26:22PM +0300, Sergei Trofimovich wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 17:29:21 -0600
> Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > On 12/29/12 4:51 PM, Sergei Trofimovich wrote:
> > > On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 14:20:29 -0600
> > > Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > >>> Panic showed all my drives and partitions which means
> > >>> they were detected correctly.
> > >
> > >> Was it a panic, or was it simply a very verbose message which contained
> > >> a backtrace?
> > >
> > >> Can you please include what you actually saw in your logs?
> > >
> > > Yes, it was a panic. Box did not boot (i would not bisect it otherwise).
> > > I won't have access to real box thus I've reproduced it in minimal
> > > UML:
> > >
> > > Current usermode linux perfectly reproduces the problem as well:
> > >
> > > $ cat ./run_ubda_fails
> > > #!/bin/sh
> > >
> > > ./vmlinux \
> > > ubd0=$(pwd)/1G.img \
> > > root=/dev/ubda \
> > > rw \
> > > mem=256M \
> > > umid=foo \
> > > \
> > > "$@"
> > > reset
> > >
> > > $ cat ./run_ubda
> > > #!/bin/sh
> > >
> > > ./vmlinux \
> > > ubd0=$(pwd)/1G.img \
> > > root=/dev/ubda \
> > > rw rootfstype=btrfs \
> > > mem=256M \
> > > umid=foo \
> > > \
> > > "$@"
> > > reset
> > >
> > > Note the rootfstype in the workign case. I've included only EXT4=y XFS=y
> > > and BTRFS=y
> > > as supported FSen. The UML OOps:
> > >
> > > [ 0.170000] VFS: Cannot open root device "ubda" or
> > > unknown-block(98,0): error -117
> >
> > Oh, ok, so it was panicing due to inability to mount root; not xfs itself
> > panicing.
> >
> > Were there any messages from xfs prior to this?
> >
> > Especially if there were none, this might fix it, though TBH it's just
> > a quick guess, I haven't really looked at how the probing works at
> > boot time recently. Can you test it?
> >
> > From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Do not return EFSCORRUPTED when filesystem probe finds no XFS magic
> >
> > 9802182 changed the return value from EWRONGFS (aka EINVAL)
> > to EFSCORRUPTED which doesn't seem to be handled properly by
> > the root filesystem probe.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Yeah, you patch is nicer. xfs_mount_validate_sb does the similar thing.
> Thanks!
>
> Tested-by: Sergei Trofimovich <slyfox@xxxxxxxxxx>
Looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: Ben Myers <bpm@xxxxxxx>
|