Re: [patch 07/66] btrfs: clear_extent_bit error push-up

2011-10-31 Thread Ilya Dryomov
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 12:13:46PM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/26/2011 12:09 PM, David Sterba wrote: On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 11:18:42AM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote: extent_io_tree *tree, u64 start, u64 end, - gfp_t

Re: [patch 07/66] btrfs: clear_extent_bit error push-up

2011-10-31 Thread Chris Mason
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 02:30:42PM +0200, Ilya Dryomov wrote: On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 12:13:46PM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/26/2011 12:09 PM, David Sterba wrote: On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 11:18:42AM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote:

Re: [patch 07/66] btrfs: clear_extent_bit error push-up

2011-10-31 Thread Jeff Mahoney
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/31/2011 09:00 AM, Chris Mason wrote: On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 02:30:42PM +0200, Ilya Dryomov wrote: On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 12:13:46PM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/26/2011 12:09 PM, David

Re: [patch 07/66] btrfs: clear_extent_bit error push-up

2011-10-31 Thread David Sterba
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 02:00:49PM +0200, David Sterba wrote: still crashes in xfstests/113 with the following fixup. so there may be more occurences of the ret value clobbering, I closely reviewed only this patch. I'll verify with just that on top. So it did not crash (though I've hit the

Re: [patch 07/66] btrfs: clear_extent_bit error push-up [other BUG hit]

2011-10-31 Thread David Sterba
[18300.906594] [ cut here ] [18300.910518] kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/inode.c:1592! [18300.910518] invalid opcode: [#1] SMP [18300.910518] CPU 1 [18300.910518] Modules linked in: btrfs loop aoe [last unloaded: btrfs] [18300.910518] [18300.910518] Pid: 1853, comm:

Re: [patch 07/66] btrfs: clear_extent_bit error push-up

2011-10-27 Thread David Sterba
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 11:18:42AM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote: and this clobber the original ret value which is returned a few lines below and used in the caller. } out: free_extent_state(cached_state); return ret; } *smack* Ugh. You're right. It avoids the corruption but

Re: [patch 07/66] btrfs: clear_extent_bit error push-up

2011-10-26 Thread David Sterba
Hi, I've tested it and still crashes in xfstets/113, but this time I know what to look for :) On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 09:02:43PM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote: --- a/fs/btrfs/extent_io.h +++ b/fs/btrfs/extent_io.h @@ -200,10 +200,10 @@ void free_extent_state(struct extent_sta int

Re: [patch 07/66] btrfs: clear_extent_bit error push-up

2011-10-26 Thread Jeff Mahoney
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/26/2011 11:10 AM, David Sterba wrote: Hi, I've tested it and still crashes in xfstets/113, but this time I know what to look for :) On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 09:02:43PM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote: --- a/fs/btrfs/extent_io.h +++

Re: [patch 07/66] btrfs: clear_extent_bit error push-up

2011-10-26 Thread David Sterba
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 11:18:42AM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote: extent_io_tree *tree, u64 start, u64 end, - gfp_t mask); + gfp_t mask) __must_check; shouldn't this be placed at the beginning of the prototype? I don't see why that

Re: [patch 07/66] btrfs: clear_extent_bit error push-up

2011-10-26 Thread Jeff Mahoney
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/26/2011 12:09 PM, David Sterba wrote: On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 11:18:42AM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote: extent_io_tree *tree, u64 start, u64 end, - gfp_t mask); + gfp_t mask) __must_check;