Lachlan McIlroy wrote:
> I hit a panic while flushing a reclaimed inode that is fairly
> reproducible under load.
With what testcase?
Thanks,
-Eric
> In xfs_iflush_fork() we're led to believe that there are extents
> on this inode but there aren't any. Actually the inode was a
> directory. I added some debugging to xfs_ifree() and found
> that di_format was XFS_DINODE_FMT_LOCAL and got reset to
> XFS_DINODE_FMT_EXTENTS and this has confused the code in
> xfs_iflush_fork().
>
> [<ffffffffa0047de7>] xfs_iext_get_ext+0x6c/0xca [xfs]
> [<ffffffffa004a3d4>] xfs_iflush_fork+0x1b0/0x3c6 [xfs]
> [<ffffffffa004aa3f>] xfs_iflush_int+0x455/0x5a1 [xfs]
> [<ffffffffa004b0da>] xfs_iflush+0x229/0x2d6 [xfs]
> [<ffffffffa007283c>] xfs_reclaim_inode+0xd8/0x10f [xfs]
> [<ffffffffa0072976>] xfs_reclaim_inodes_ag+0x103/0x13e [xfs]
> [<ffffffffa00729f3>] xfs_reclaim_inodes+0x42/0x60 [xfs]
> [<ffffffffa0072d1b>] xfs_sync_worker+0x30/0x8a [xfs]
> [<ffffffffa0073416>] xfssyncd+0x14e/0x1a2 [xfs]
> [<ffffffffa00732c8>] ? xfssyncd+0x0/0x1a2 [xfs]
> [<ffffffff8104fc70>] kthread+0x49/0x79
>
> I made this change and it passes the load test and XFSQA too. I'm
> not sure if this is indicative of a bigger problem though.
>
> Index: xfs-fix/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
> ===================================================================
> --- xfs-fix.orig/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
> +++ xfs-fix/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
> @@ -2165,8 +2165,6 @@ xfs_ifree(
> ip->i_d.di_forkoff = 0; /* mark the attr fork not in use */
> ip->i_df.if_ext_max =
> XFS_IFORK_DSIZE(ip) / (uint)sizeof(xfs_bmbt_rec_t);
> - ip->i_d.di_format = XFS_DINODE_FMT_EXTENTS;
> - ip->i_d.di_aformat = XFS_DINODE_FMT_EXTENTS;
> /*
> * Bump the generation count so no one will be confused
> * by reincarnations of this inode.
>
> _______________________________________________
> xfs mailing list
> xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
>
|