linux-ext4 - Re: Bug#615998: linux-image-2.6.32-5-xen-amd64: Repeatable "kernel BUG at fs/jbd2/commit.c:534" from Postfix on ext4

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 27 Jun 2011 14:57:05 +0300
From:	Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>
To:	Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>
Cc:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
	"Moffett, Kyle D" <Kyle.D.Moffett@...ing.com>,
	Sean Ryle <seanbo@...il.com>, "Ted Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
	"615998@...s.debian.org" <615998@...s.debian.org>,
	"linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
	Sachin Sant <sachinp@...ibm.com>,
	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Bug#615998: linux-image-2.6.32-5-xen-amd64: Repeatable "kernel
 BUG at fs/jbd2/commit.c:534" from Postfix on ext4

On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Jun 2011, Jan Kara wrote:
>
>> On Fri 24-06-11 11:03:52, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
>> > On Jun 24, 2011, at 09:46, Jan Kara wrote:
>> > > On Thu 23-06-11 16:19:08, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
>> > >> Besides which, line 534 in the Debian 2.6.32 kernel I am using is this
>> > >> one:
>> > >>
>> > >>  J_ASSERT(commit_transaction->t_nr_buffers <=
>> > >>           commit_transaction->t_outstanding_credits);
>> > >
>> > >  Hmm, OK, so we've used more metadata buffers than we told JBD2 to
>> > > reserve. I suppose you are not using data=journal mode and the filesystem
>> > > was created as ext4 (i.e. not converted from ext3), right? Are you using
>> > > quotas?
>> >
>> > The filesystem *is* using data=journal mode.  If I switch to data=ordered
>> > or data=writeback, the problem goes away.
>>   Ah, OK. Then bug https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34642 is
>> probably ext3 incarnation of the same problem and it seems it's still
>> present even in the current kernel - that ext3 assertion triggered even
>> with 2.6.39 kernel. Frankly data=journal mode is far less tested than the
>> other two modes especially with ext4, so I'm not sure how good idea is to
>> use it in production.
>
> Hi Jan,
>
> if it is so (and it probably is, since I am not testing this mode as
> well:), it would be interesting to find out whether there are many users
> of this and if there are not, which is probably the case, deprecate it now,
> so we can remove it later. If we are openly suggesting not to use this,
> then there is probably no point in having this option in the first
> place.
>
> I vaguely remember that Ted said something about removing data=journal
> mode, but I do not remember details. Ted ?
>

I think Ted was plotting about removing data=ordered...

Amir.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html