linux-kernel - Re: kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c:1466!

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]

Message-ID: <CADDYkjRcRbxxPErdMBOs55-gNHZA0GfxcsWNrVbAuv37b3rtvw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 9 Mar 2012 12:08:12 +0100
From:	Jacek Luczak <difrost.kernel@...il.com>
To:	dave@...os.cz, Liu Bo <liubo2009@...fujitsu.com>,
	Jacek Luczak <difrost.kernel@...il.com>,
	linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, josef@...hat.com
Subject: Re: kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c:1466!

2012/3/9 David Sterba <dave@...os.cz>:
> On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 09:31:25AM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
>> > There were quite many things happening in the system at that time.
>> > Can't really tell what could trigger this.
>> >
>> > Complete logs: http://91.234.146.107/~difrost/logs/tampere_log.gz
>> >
>> So are these warnings based on the latest upstream of btrfs?
>
> No, from the log it's 3.2.7, so it does not conain the patch
>
> "increase the global block reserve estimates"
>
> the log shows lots of messages
>
> Mar  8 13:36:37 kernel: use_block_rsv: 7 callbacks suppressed
> Mar  8 13:36:37 kernel: ------------[ cut here ]------------
> Mar  8 13:36:37 kernel: WARNING: at fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:5985 btrfs_alloc_free_block+0xc5/0x292 [btrfs]()
> ...
> Mar  8 13:36:37 kernel:  [<ffffffffa031161f>] ? btrfs_alloc_free_block+0xc5/0x292 [btrfs]
> Mar  8 13:36:37 kernel:  [<ffffffff8106901d>] ? warn_slowpath_common+0x78/0x8d
> Mar  8 13:36:37 kernel:  [<ffffffffa031161f>] ? btrfs_alloc_free_block+0xc5/0x292 [btrfs]
> Mar  8 13:36:37 kernel:  [<ffffffffa032bbad>] ? btrfs_item_offset+0x2c/0x61 [btrfs]
> Mar  8 13:36:37 kernel:  [<ffffffffa03007dc>] ? leaf_space_used+0x86/0xb5 [btrfs]
> Mar  8 13:36:39 kernel:  [<ffffffffa0304a7a>] ? split_leaf+0x2d9/0x632 [btrfs]
> Mar  8 13:36:39 kernel:  [<ffffffffa0306261>] ? btrfs_search_slot+0x6c1/0x75a [btrfs]
> Mar  8 13:36:40 kernel:  [<ffffffffa0306e6e>] ? btrfs_insert_empty_items+0x61/0xab [btrfs]
> Mar  8 13:36:41 kernel:  [<ffffffffa032207c>] ? insert_inline_extent+0xea/0x2d4 [btrfs]
> Mar  8 13:36:41 kernel:  [<ffffffffa0322389>] ? cow_file_range_inline+0x123/0x163 [btrfs]
> ...

For this one I've created also a report [1].

>
> so there is probably other problem in reservations and it just blew up during
> the unlink call.

Could be as this came up after a longer time of throwing above WARN_ON.

I'm now cloning the Linus tree. Lets see if both will pop up on there.

-Jacek

[1] http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-btrfs/msg15404.html
--
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/