[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] xfs: fix node forward in xfs_node_toosmall

To: "Michael L. Semon" <mlsemon35@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: fix node forward in xfs_node_toosmall
From: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 16:45:31 -0500
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <5240B3F1.4040305@xxxxxxxxx>
References: <20130920220519.585903357@xxxxxxx> <5240B3F1.4040305@xxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:9.0) Gecko/20120122 Thunderbird/9.0
On 09/23/13 16:34, Michael L. Semon wrote:
On 09/20/2013 06:05 PM, Mark Tinguely wrote:
Commit f5ea1100 cleans up the disk to host conversions for
node directory entries, but because a variable is reused in
xfs_node_toosmall() the next node is not correctly found.
If the original node is small enough (<= 3/8 of the node size),
this change may incorrectly cause a node collapse when it should
not. That will cause an assert in xfstest generic/319:

    Assertion failed: first<= last&&  last<  BBTOB(bp->b_length),
    file: /root/newest/xfs/fs/xfs/xfs_trans_buf.c, line: 569

Keep the original node header to get the correct forward node.

This works for xfstests generic/319 on 32-bit x86.  The xfstests
run was okay, with a lockdep in the middle and a crash in xfs/300.
Neither the lockdep nor the crash could reproduced by running
individual tests one by one.

generic/319 itself fails only because it couldn't find its
_cleanup routine.  I'm not sure if I'm using v1 or v2 of

The kernel is set to the commit just before the latest aio-next
merge, which is causing severe problems here.  xfsprogs was the
latest production xfsprogs because my copy of xfstests is having
trouble checking v4 XFS filesystems otherwise.

Will test xfs_node_toosmall patch v2 once I get home.



319 v1 had the cleanup and removed in v2 because of feedback.
IMO, it should be there even basically empty.


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