On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 11:37:43AM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 10:49 AM, Omar Sandoval <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 08:51:24PM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote: > >> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 5:05 PM, Omar Sandoval <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > Thanks! Hmm, okay, so it's coming from btrfs_update_delayed_inode()... > >> > That's probably us failing btrfs_lookup_inode(), but just to make sure, > >> > could you apply the updated diff at the same link as before > >> > (https://gist.github.com/osandov/9f223bda27f3e1cd1ab9c1bd634c51a4)? If > >> > that's the case, I'm even more confused about what xattrs have to do > >> > with it. > >> > >> [ 35.015363] __btrfs_update_delayed_inode(): inode is missing > > > > Okay, like I expected... > > > >> [ 35.015372] btrfs_update_delayed_inode(ino=2) -> -2 > > > > Wtf? Inode numbers should be >=256. I updated the diff a third time to > > catch where that came from. If we're lucky, the backtrace should have > > the exact culprit. If we're unlucky, there might be memory corruption > > involved. > > Now two traces. This one is new, and follows a bunch of xattr related stuff... > > [ 6.861504] WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 690 at fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c:55 > btrfs_get_or_create_delayed_node+0x16a/0x1e0 [btrfs] > [ 6.862833] ino 2 is out of range > > Then this: > [ 7.016061] __btrfs_update_delayed_inode(): inode is missing > [ 7.017149] btrfs_update_delayed_inode() failed > [ 7.018233] __btrfs_commit_inode_delayed_items(ino=2, flags=3) -> -2 > > And finally what we've already seen: > [ 34.930890] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 396 at > fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c:1194 __btrfs_run_delayed_items+0x1d0/0x670 > [btrfs] > > Complete dmesg osandov-9f223b-3_dmesg.log > https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B_2Asp8DGjJ9bnpNamIydklraTQ >
Aha, so it is xattrs! Here's the full warning trace: [ 6.860185] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [ 6.861504] WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 690 at fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c:55 btrfs_get_or_create_delayed_node+0x16a/0x1e0 [btrfs] [ 6.862833] ino 2 is out of range [ 6.862842] Modules linked in: [ 6.864213] xfs libcrc32c arc4 iwlmvm intel_rapl x86_pkg_temp_thermal intel_powerclamp coretemp mac80211 snd_soc_skl kvm_intel snd_soc_skl_ipc kvm snd_hda_codec_hdmi snd_soc_sst_ipc irqbypass snd_soc_sst_dsp crct10dif_pclmul iTCO_wdt crc32_pclmul snd_hda_codec_conexant snd_hda_ext_core snd_hda_codec_generic ghash_clmulni_intel iTCO_vendor_support snd_soc_sst_match intel_cstate snd_soc_core iwlwifi i2c_designware_platform i2c_designware_core hp_wmi sparse_keymap snd_hda_intel intel_uncore snd_hda_codec cfg80211 snd_hwdep snd_hda_core snd_seq snd_seq_device uvcvideo intel_rapl_perf snd_pcm videobuf2_vmalloc videobuf2_memops videobuf2_v4l2 videobuf2_core joydev videodev idma64 snd_timer btusb hci_uart i2c_i801 snd i2c_smbus media btrtl btbcm soundcore btqca btintel mei_me mei bluetooth shpchp processor_thermal_device [ 6.869661] intel_pch_thermal intel_lpss_pci intel_soc_dts_iosf ucsi wmi hp_accel pinctrl_sunrisepoint lis3lv02d pinctrl_intel int3403_thermal rfkill input_polldev hp_wireless intel_lpss_acpi int340x_thermal_zone nfsd int3400_thermal intel_lpss tpm_crb acpi_thermal_rel acpi_pad tpm_tis tpm_tis_core tpm auth_rpcgss nfs_acl lockd grace sunrpc btrfs i915 xor raid6_pq i2c_algo_bit drm_kms_helper drm crc32c_intel nvme serio_raw nvme_core i2c_hid video fjes [ 6.874780] CPU: 3 PID: 690 Comm: systemd-tmpfile Not tainted 4.9.0+ #2 [ 6.876294] Hardware name: HP HP Spectre Notebook/81A0, BIOS F.30 12/15/2016 [ 6.877820] ffff9bc341187a78 ffffffff923ed9ed ffff9bc341187ac8 0000000000000000 [ 6.879316] ffff9bc341187ab8 ffffffff920a1d9b 00000037921cafcb 0000000000000002 [ 6.880836] ffff8c4126d62000 ffff8c413170b0b0 ffffffffffffff02 ffff8c4129a8f300 [ 6.882364] Call Trace: [ 6.883861] [<ffffffff923ed9ed>] dump_stack+0x63/0x86 [ 6.885355] [<ffffffff920a1d9b>] __warn+0xcb/0xf0 [ 6.886888] [<ffffffff920a1e1f>] warn_slowpath_fmt+0x5f/0x80 [ 6.888415] [<ffffffffc04a9426>] ? btrfs_get_or_create_delayed_node+0x126/0x1e0 [btrfs] [ 6.889979] [<ffffffffc04a946a>] btrfs_get_or_create_delayed_node+0x16a/0x1e0 [btrfs] [ 6.891498] [<ffffffffc04ac3c7>] btrfs_delayed_update_inode+0x27/0x420 [btrfs] [ 6.893023] [<ffffffff9210de03>] ? current_fs_time+0x23/0x30 [ 6.894602] [<ffffffffc0453bbd>] btrfs_update_inode+0x8d/0x100 [btrfs] [ 6.896122] [<ffffffff92270626>] ? current_time+0x36/0x70 [ 6.897681] [<ffffffffc0469503>] __btrfs_setxattr+0xe3/0x120 [btrfs] [ 6.899212] [<ffffffffc0469576>] btrfs_xattr_handler_set+0x36/0x40 [btrfs] [ 6.900690] [<ffffffff9227ac6b>] __vfs_setxattr+0x6b/0x90 [ 6.902182] [<ffffffff9227b912>] __vfs_setxattr_noperm+0x72/0x1b0 [ 6.903622] [<ffffffff9227baf7>] vfs_setxattr+0xa7/0xb0 [ 6.905078] [<ffffffff9227bc60>] setxattr+0x160/0x180 [ 6.906515] [<ffffffff9224fa3f>] ? __check_object_size+0xff/0x1d6 [ 6.907894] [<ffffffff9241ecad>] ? strncpy_from_user+0x4d/0x170 [ 6.909231] [<ffffffff9226456f>] ? getname_flags+0x6f/0x1f0 [ 6.910590] [<ffffffff9227bd33>] path_setxattr+0xb3/0xe0 [ 6.911913] [<ffffffff9227bea1>] SyS_lsetxattr+0x11/0x20 [ 6.913211] [<ffffffff92003c17>] do_syscall_64+0x67/0x180 [ 6.914557] [<ffffffff9280a3ab>] entry_SYSCALL64_slow_path+0x25/0x25 [ 6.915862] ---[ end trace 16f2b6ce06b1433e ]--- > Also, to do these tests, I'm making a new rw snapshot each time so > that the new kernel modules are in the snapshot. e.g. > > 1. subvolumes 'home' and 'root' are originally created with 'btrfs sub > create' and then filled, and these work OK with all kernels. > 2. build kernel with patch > 3. 'btrfs sub snap root root.test8' and also 'btrfs sub snap home home.test8' > 4. sudo vi root.test8/etc/fstab to update the entry for / so that > subvol=root is now subvol=root.test8, and also update for /home > 5. sudo vi /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/grub.cfg to update the command line, > rootflags=subvol=root becomes rootflags=subvol=root.test8 > > So the fact the kernel works on subvolume root, but consistently does > not work on each brand new snapshot, is suspiciously unlike what I'd > expect for memory corruption; unless the memory corruption has already > "tainted" the file system in a way that neither btrfs check or scrub > can find; and this "taintedness" of the file system doesn't manifest > until there's a snapshot being used and with a particular kernel with > the xattr patch? > > Pretty weird. Yup, definitely doesn't look like memory corruption. I set up a Fedora VM yesterday to try to repro with basically those same steps but it didn't happen. I'll try again, but is there anything special about your Fedora installation? I installed Fedora Server with however the installer set up Btrfs. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
