| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <4A036FBC.9020201@sandeen.net> Date: Thu, 07 May 2009 18:33:16 -0500 From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...deen.net> To: Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@...il.com> CC: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Kernel Testers List <kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org>, xfs@....sgi.com Subject: Re: 2.6.30-rc4: xfs_fsr hangs Alexander Beregalov wrote: > # xfs_db -r /dev/sdc1 > xfs_db> frag > actual 23805, ideal 22890, fragmentation factor 3.84% > # xfs_fsr -v /dev/sdc1 > /mnt/c start inode=0 > ino=158 > extents before:3 after:1 DONE ino=158 > > then it hangs Ok, yep with the testcase I proposed I see this on the fedora 2.6.30-rc4.git3 x86 kernel as well: # for I in `seq 10 -1 0`; do dd if=/dev/zero of=fragfile bs=4k count=1 seek=$I conv=notrunc oflag=sync done # xfs_fsr fragfile ===================================== [ BUG: bad unlock balance detected! ] ------------------------------------- xfs_fsr/1459 is trying to release lock (&(&ip->i_iolock)->mr_lock) at: [<e248dedb>] xfs_iunlock+0x2c/0x92 [xfs] but there are no more locks to release! other info that might help us debug this: no locks held by xfs_fsr/1459. stack backtrace: Pid: 1459, comm: xfs_fsr Not tainted 2.6.30-0.78.rc4.git3.fc12.i586 #1 Call Trace: [<c07e2f2e>] ? printk+0x22/0x3c [<c0465f34>] print_unlock_inbalance_bug+0xb3/0xd1 [<e248dedb>] ? xfs_iunlock+0x2c/0x92 [xfs] [<c04661e2>] lock_release+0xd0/0x1a6 [<c04571ce>] up_write+0x29/0x50 [<e248dedb>] xfs_iunlock+0x2c/0x92 [xfs] [<e2496bdb>] xfs_swap_extents+0x427/0x4cc [xfs] [<e2496d5a>] xfs_swapext+0xda/0x11c [xfs] [<c0a4586d>] ? kobject_uevent_init+0x30/0x6d [<e24b2386>] xfs_file_ioctl+0x4ac/0x67e [xfs] [<c0592f00>] ? avc_has_perm_noaudit+0x3b1/0x3cc [<e24b1eda>] ? xfs_file_ioctl+0x0/0x67e [xfs] [<c04ec8fa>] vfs_ioctl+0x29/0x91 [<c04ecdf8>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x496/0x4e3 [<c0a4586d>] ? kobject_uevent_init+0x30/0x6d [<c05946b7>] ? selinux_file_ioctl+0x4d/0x62 [<c0a4586d>] ? kobject_uevent_init+0x30/0x6d [<c04ece9a>] sys_ioctl+0x55/0x86 [<c040c6cb>] ? syscall_trace_enter+0xea/0x10f [<c040419c>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb [<c0a4586d>] ? kobject_uevent_init+0x30/0x6d there are 2 subsequent unlocks for the same inode: 1: xfs_iunlock: ip ca2304c0 ino 132 flags 0x5 Pid: 3648, comm: xfs_fsr Not tainted 2.6.30-0.78.rc4.git3.fc12.i586 #1 Call Trace: [<e3a81ee7>] xfs_iunlock+0x38/0xb9 [xfs] [<e3a82404>] xfs_iput+0x20/0x40 [xfs] [<e3a8793b>] xfs_inode_item_unlock+0x82/0x97 [xfs] [<e3a9a288>] xfs_trans_unlock_chunk+0x96/0xe1 [xfs] [<e3a9a37a>] xfs_trans_unlock_items+0x4f/0xd4 [xfs] [<e3a985a9>] _xfs_trans_commit+0x275/0x307 [xfs] [<e3a8ac27>] xfs_swap_extents+0x403/0x4cc [xfs] [<e3a8adca>] xfs_swapext+0xda/0x11c [xfs] [<e3aa63f6>] xfs_file_ioctl+0x4ac/0x67e [xfs] [<c04ec8fa>] vfs_ioctl+0x29/0x91 [<c04ecdf8>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x496/0x4e3 [<c04ece9a>] sys_ioctl+0x55/0x86 [<c040419c>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb 2: xfs_iunlock: ip ca230980 ino 131 flags 0x5 Pid: 3648, comm: xfs_fsr Not tainted 2.6.30-0.78.rc4.git3.fc12.i586 #1 Call Trace: [<e3a81ee7>] xfs_iunlock+0x38/0xb9 [xfs] [<e3a8ac4b>] xfs_swap_extents+0x427/0x4cc [xfs] [<e3a8adca>] xfs_swapext+0xda/0x11c [xfs] [<e3aa63f6>] xfs_file_ioctl+0x4ac/0x67e [xfs] [<c04ec8fa>] vfs_ioctl+0x29/0x91 [<c04ecdf8>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x496/0x4e3 [<c04ece9a>] sys_ioctl+0x55/0x86 [<c040419c>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb Looking into it ... not sure offhand what caused this. -Eric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists