[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Read corruption on ARM

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Read corruption on ARM
From: Jason Detring <detringj@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 17:21:15 -0600
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=vrQNnmtrEQ2MVsZHMlbmWzEzUFR5pxBda/0XBHkyXIs=; b=k3sdHIiTDUuEpn7nLzt/U9vWoMpcosZnJQx5064qlkPpV45RwjkOFPrqlcl/Tjv3Jd S1ViZ/pQdMpWGNDqCtVFEsd1xIAUBfs80dtEQq/LD/Z4EVDpJoLX09MLY3VcYrzdTwg9 5iX3Sv2VRhhxj0sxqElqFQhLngbt1W49uAVSfq736AIwEipleKvSz7FC7XR+jw57Ccnr PAD8V+xjtWMctwhVgJoL8qXLvLx5WyFx01dEwddo/6BTO6Cz4xq6qyLVzI5QEFgOUyDn 7pnXVjqeGKSJ5alUirtBqPjNYLccAIxj3f5QYwQKoD3/P6PLF10cJCrpx2cd7mUE+H8r lC2w==
In-reply-to: <512D3C71.1030100@xxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <CA+AKrqBQ=VG0oVsai+agywDKRgO9cG9AvT6mCTSZxKO3Si5Aiw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <512D390D.7060302@xxxxxxxxxxx> <512D3C71.1030100@xxxxxxxxxxx>
On 2/26/13, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 2/26/13 4:37 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> On 2/26/13 3:58 PM, Jason Detring wrote:
>>> Hello list,
>> <snip>
>>> This also seems to impact the Raspberry Pi.  Below shows a 256 MB test
>>> case filesystem.
>>> The filesystem was created on an x86-64 box by mkfs.xfs 3.1.8 and
>>> populated by kernel 3.6.9.
>>> This failure report is Linux 3.6.11-g89caf39 built by GCC 4.7.2 from
>>>    <https://github.com/raspberrypi/linux/commits/rpi-3.6.y>
>>> The problem appears to be tied to the filesystem, not the media,
>>> since both an external USB reader and a loopback-mounted image on the
>>> unit's main SD media show the same backtrace.  The loopback image was
>>> captured on other hardware, then copied onto the RPi via network.
>> Missed this; let me fire up my pi and see if I can replicate it.
> Realized that I'll need to cross-compile xfs.ko I guess...
> But - do you see this when the *whole* kernel is cross-compiled?
> Building the kernel one way and xfs another way, with another gcc,
> is probably nothing but trouble.  :)

Yes, I did.  I remember seeing it in months past when those compilers
were freshly released.  I only mixed-and-matched here as a spot check
to be sure the errors were still present.  For any Real Serious
Business, I'll build end-to-end with the same compiler.

I've uploaded my demonstration problem file system here:
This throws a backtrace when "find ." is run on the mountpoint.  The
junk in the file system is just that--filler.  Don't take the kernel
archives as debugging builds.


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