| To: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [xfs-masters] 2.6.29-rc: kernel BUG at fs/xfs/support/debug.c:108 |
| From: | Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 23 Jan 2009 21:34:36 +0300 |
| Cc: | Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs-masters@xxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, kernel-testers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| Dkim-signature: | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=WMY5tJUZGY+wDX10W6rK9EVvsVa691JwmiAEfTgTTY0=; b=JuK7h9QhOTk4EYk5/TEBF7xAgkVYVgYm8thLrX/zK9egNfLKAW2k+wesQeimu7qgkG QKWSfOSN4m2rSKpHGs5p6WqSZQD7wUnp1GZ6TngW9j0rSo21jydSm/CzNeB9sH51llTk DLPAYGYwNJOcdJtGlv8rvdP2RPjilTJL/NCGs= |
| Domainkey-signature: | a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=QJwWBnmBpsR5z3fuv4JBfOYAe0kpQi6t3oXIGnqUbatE+NbkqA7QTdtQZqZLVNBx/A lFbfKMmaQQHzUjm4un8d2Sdwm2ViUqSZT6Fi5js20Hjwmx+ZyGb4vzeoXWUcG5yPNtlW DAG1e7aI/6DJR0EEyaVRpbqSkskvBB2UXdES4= |
| In-reply-to: | <20090120203319.GA7103@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20090110143924.GA25900@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20090110152803.GA7469@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20090110221459.GA8873@orion> <20090111104659.GB8071@disturbed> <a4423d670901111648w26e86baajcf7b6d98ff37d043@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20090112034550.GI8071@disturbed> <a4423d670901120008j728af9cdrbed8bbb938117ea3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20090112211848.GL8071@disturbed> <a4423d670901201054t3e48ece2ned4a7e3254250fce@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20090120203319.GA7103@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
2009/1/20 Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 09:54:44PM +0300, Alexander Beregalov wrote: >> Hi >> >> Is it a new bug? >> It is pre-2.6.29-rc1 kernel, which was supossed to be free of the bug >> "fs_is_ok, file: fs/xfs/xfs_btree.c, line: 3327" > > From the trace it's a post-btree consolidation kernel, so all the bugs > in -rc1 are there, too. It looks like this is the readahead type > cockup that Geert noticed, so this particular one should be fixed in > -rc2. > > I would strongly recommend to just turn on CNFIG_LBD for post-2.6.28 > kernels for now as all the problems showing up are without CONFIG_LBD. Yes, both bugs do not appear on kernel with CONFIG_LBD=y. But I do not need LBD. Does XFS strongly require LBD? Should I always turn it on even if I do not have files or devices of size 2Tb+ ? |
| Previous by Date: | Re: Strange fragmentation in nearly empty filesystem, Eric Sandeen |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: spurious -ENOSPC on XFS, Mikulas Patocka |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [xfs-masters] 2.6.29-rc: kernel BUG at fs/xfs/support/debug.c:108, Christoph Hellwig |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [xfs-masters] 2.6.29-rc: kernel BUG at fs/xfs/support/debug.c:108, Christoph Hellwig |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |