Re: [uml-devel] btrfs failure and BUG_ON behaviour

2011-04-12 Thread richard -rw- weinberger
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 12:13 PM, Sergei Trofimovich wrote: > On Tue, 12 Apr 2011 01:13:30 +0200 > richard -rw- weinberger wrote: > >> >   Here we have BUG_ON in lookup_inline_extent_backref+0x2dc/0x3f0, but >> > that pesky >> >   hard_handler. Is it an UML bug or known and expected behaviour? >

Re: [uml-devel] btrfs failure and BUG_ON behaviour

2011-04-12 Thread Sergei Trofimovich
On Tue, 12 Apr 2011 01:13:30 +0200 richard -rw- weinberger wrote: > >   Here we have BUG_ON in lookup_inline_extent_backref+0x2dc/0x3f0, but that > > pesky > >   hard_handler. Is it an UML bug or known and expected behaviour? > > Can you please test the attached patch? > The trace was broken

Re: [uml-devel] btrfs failure and BUG_ON behaviour

2011-04-11 Thread richard -rw- weinberger
On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 4:04 PM, Sergei Trofimovich wrote: > I've decided to use UML when caught some hard to > debug OOpses on btrfs. > > The first attempt to use btrfs on UML gave me stable > UML crash. I suspect it's a UML's problem. > > So I have some questions here (I'm on x86_64, > 2.6.39-rc2

Re: [uml-devel] btrfs failure and BUG_ON behaviour

2011-04-10 Thread Sergei Trofimovich
> I'll try to send bug report to linux-btrfs mailing list first > and return if I'll have more details. I've bisected it down to memcpy changes 59daa706fbec745684702741b9f5373142dd9fdc and found out btrfs piece of code passing overlapping areas to memcpy. Sorry for the noise. -- Sergei sig

Re: [uml-devel] btrfs failure and BUG_ON behaviour

2011-04-09 Thread Sergei Trofimovich
On Sat, 9 Apr 2011 23:33:14 +0200 richard -rw- weinberger wrote: > We have had some problems with the block layer in ~2.6.32 to 2.6.35. > Commit 4752690 fixed the issues. > > Can you please re-test it with 2.6.38? Same crash with 2.6.38, so it's either very sneaky btrfs bug or some discrepancy

Re: [uml-devel] btrfs failure and BUG_ON behaviour

2011-04-09 Thread richard -rw- weinberger
On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 4:04 PM, Sergei Trofimovich wrote: > I've decided to use UML when caught some hard to > debug OOpses on btrfs. > > The first attempt to use btrfs on UML gave me stable > UML crash. I suspect it's a UML's problem. > > So I have some questions here (I'm on x86_64, > 2.6.39-rc2

[uml-devel] btrfs failure and BUG_ON behaviour

2011-04-09 Thread Sergei Trofimovich
I've decided to use UML when caught some hard to debug OOpses on btrfs. The first attempt to use btrfs on UML gave me stable UML crash. I suspect it's a UML's problem. So I have some questions here (I'm on x86_64, 2.6.39-rc2): 1. (major one) BUG_ON trace in UML does not look as in real kernel