[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7b476728-75f8-e3d3-1261-b9b0d598ed10@fb.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 17:18:46 -0400
From: Chris Mason <clm@...com>
To: Dave Jones <davej@...emonkey.org.uk>,
Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>, Josef Bacik <jbacik@...com>,
David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>, <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: btrfs bio linked list corruption.
On 10/13/2016 02:16 PM, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:42:46AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > On 10/12/2016 10:40 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 09:47:17AM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 11:54:09AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/11/2016 10:45 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
> > > > > > This is from Linus' current tree, with Al's iovec fixups on top.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ------------[ cut here ]------------
> > > > > > WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 3673 at lib/list_debug.c:33 __list_add+0x89/0xb0
> > > > > > list_add corruption. prev->next should be next (ffffe8ffff806648), but was ffffc9000067fcd8. (prev=ffff880503878b80).
> > > > > > CPU: 1 PID: 3673 Comm: trinity-c0 Not tainted 4.8.0-think+ #13
> > > > > > ffffc90000d87458 ffffffff8d32007c ffffc90000d874a8 0000000000000000
> > > > > > ffffc90000d87498 ffffffff8d07a6c1 0000002100000246 ffff88050388e880
> > > >
> > > > I hit this again overnight, it's the same trace, the only difference
> > > > being slightly different addresses in the list pointers:
> > > >
> > > > [42572.777196] list_add corruption. prev->next should be next (ffffe8ffff806648), but was ffffc90000647cd8. (prev=ffff880503a0ba00).
> > > >
> > > > I'm actually a little surprised that ->next was the same across two
> > > > reboots on two different kernel builds. That might be a sign this is
> > > > more repeatable than I'd thought, even if it does take hours of runtime
> > > > right now to trigger it. I'll try and narrow the scope of what trinity
> > > > is doing to see if I can make it happen faster.
> > >
> > > .. and of course the first thing that happens is a completely different
> > > btrfs trace..
> > >
> > >
> > > WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 21706 at fs/btrfs/transaction.c:489 start_transaction+0x40a/0x440 [btrfs]
> > > CPU: 1 PID: 21706 Comm: trinity-c16 Not tainted 4.8.0-think+ #14
> > > ffffc900019076a8 ffffffffb731ff3c 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
> > > ffffc900019076e8 ffffffffb707a6c1 000001e9f5806ce0 ffff8804f74c4d98
> > > 0000000000000801 ffff880501cfa2a8 000000000000008a 000000000000008a
> >
> > This isn't even IO. Uuughhhh. We're going to need a fast enough test
> > that we can bisect.
>
> Progress...
> I've found that this combination of syscalls..
>
> ./trinity -C64 -q -l off -a64 --enable-fds=testfile -c fsync -c fsetxattr -c lremovexattr -c pwritev2
>
> hits one of these two bugs in a few minutes runtime.
>
> Just the xattr syscalls + fsync isn't enough, neither is just pwrite + fsync.
> Mix them together though, and something goes awry.
>
Hasn't triggered here yet. I'll leave it running though.
-chris
Powered by blists - more mailing lists