Message-ID: <50643C4A.9010202@ahsoftware.de>
Date:	Thu, 27 Sep 2012 13:45:14 +0200
From:	Alexander Holler <holler@...oftware.de>
To:	Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: kernel BUG at fs/buffer.c:3205 (stable 3.5.3)

Am 25.09.2012 13:02, schrieb Dan Carpenter:
> Did any of the old kernels work?  Have you ruled out bad hardware?

Older kernels worked and I could make full backups without any problems. 
I'm using that hardware since several years, and never had a problem 
with that, at least when I've used only one external usb hard disk (see 
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14785 for problems I had 
(and still have) when using multiple usb2 disks attached to this box.

But what now happend is a bit worrying. I needed about two days to build 
a full backup which didn't failed when I've compared the backup (either 
by checksum or by bzip2 -t). Worrying here is that many of those tries 
to build a sane backup didn't indicated any error while doing the 
backup. Only afterwards, either by a wrong checksum, by a broken tar.bz2 
archive , or even by different content of the (compressed) tar archive 
(checked with tar djf ...) the errors where visible. I first thought the 
problem might be the (new) usb3 card, but I'm also had problems by using 
the usb3-disk at an usb2 port. The external disk (new too) doesn't seem 
to be the problem, because I don't have any problems when using it on 
another box (a laptop with 3.5.3 and now 3.5.4 too).

The problem is that I do full backups only seldom (I'm using git push to 
do regular backups), so I can't say when this started (I'm usually using 
the latest stable kernel). Userland hasn't changed too (still was F15, I 
did the full backup to upgrade to F17 afterwards).

Another problem is that I don't know if the problem occured by using tar 
or just by using dd. Target was in all cases an ext4-partition on the 
external disk.

> If the answers to both questions are yes then it makes your email
> harder to ignore.  In which case, we'd probably want the complete
> dmesg.

I don't think the problem is usb related because I had the problem when 
attaching the disk to an usb2-port as well as when attaching the disk to 
an usb3-port (different adapter). I guess I'm getting hit by some 
race-condition caused by the high io-throughput (as said tar or dd | 
mbuffer | bzip2smp) in combination with the 7 compressing threads. In 
the last days I even got an error using 3.5.4 when I've copied a file 
with a size of about 3gb from nfs to tmpfs and afterwards to an usb-disk 
attached to an usb2-port. The file was broken (checksum didn't match), 
but I haven't had an oops or another error during that operation. So the 
oops might be just an indication of something else which goes wrong here.

I've attached a full dmesg when such an oops occured. It's full with 
thermal events, caused through the high pressure happening when using 
bzip2smp (which starts 7 or threads by default on this ht-enabled cpu). 
But those are normal, the fan is working as expected and it is the 
original one which I got in conjunction with the processor, room 
temperatur was around 25°C, so nothing exceptional and I usually just 
ignore those messages because I never had a problem.

And I have to mention that I haven't experienced a problem, when I've 
used tar cp | mbuffer | tar xp to copy a 50gb ext4-partion from one 
sata-attached ssd to another (in the same box). Comparing the result 
didn't indicate any error (of course, memory pressure was less as no 
bzip2smp was involved).

Reading my experiences above by myself, it looks a bit more like a 
problem in the usb-stack (in contrast to what I've written above) 
because I usually don't get any throttling events while copying just a 
file (regardless how large it is). But, it's just a guess. It might be 
hw-problem, I've never trusted this cpu and/or chipset when usb is 
involved and had the hope usb might become usable on that box when using 
an external usb3-adapter. But ...

So to conclude the whole story, I don't have much hope that it might be 
possible to find the problem without me doing a lot of tries and because 
I'm using this box regulary, I'm not sure if can accomplish that. The 
oops might be an indication, but I'm not sure. It's time consuming for 
me to read through the involved code and guessing whats happening there. 
I like to do so, but ... ;)
Maybe I just should throw this machine out of the window and get some 
other hw. ;)

I wouldn't have posted that problem, if I wouldn't have that oops (I got 
it 2 times) which might be of interest for someone. ;)

I've attached the log and my kernel config.

Regards,

Alexander


View attachment "messages.txt" of type "text/plain" (224374 bytes)

View attachment "config-3.5.4.txt" of type "text/plain" (99367 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists