Hi Alex, On Tue, 2008-03-25 at 11:25 +0100, Alexander Schier wrote: > kernel BUG at /home/allo/nilfs-2.0.0/fs/page.c:436! > invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT > Modules linked in: nilfs2 sha256_generic aes_i586 aes_generic cbc blkcipher > nfsd exportfs ipv6 nfs lockd sunrpc dm_crypt dm_mod analog gameport > parport_pc parport snd_intel8x0 snd_ac97_codec ehci_hcd ohci_hcd uhci_hcd > ac97_bus snd_pcm snd_timer snd snd_page_alloc usbcore > > Pid: 2456, comm: rsync Not tainted (2.6.24.2 #2) > EIP: 0060:[<e0e58cff>] EFLAGS: 00010246 CPU: 0 > EIP is at nilfs_free_buffer_page+0x29/0x32 [nilfs2] > EAX: 00000000 EBX: c1366360 ECX: d6b161a4 EDX: cfc71e48 > ESI: c1366360 EDI: 00000001 EBP: d6b14334 ESP: cfc71e58 > DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 0000 GS: 0033 SS: 0068 > Process rsync (pid: 2456, ti=cfc70000 task=ddcabaa0 task.ti=cfc70000) > Stack: 00000001 e0e5a207 c1366360 00000001 00000001 e0e5aa0a 00000010 > c1366360 > 00000004 00000000 00000000 00000005 00000000 00081088 00000000 > 00081089 > 00000000 0008108a 00000000 0008108b 00000000 00000000 00000000 > 00081090 > Call Trace: > [<e0e5a207>] nilfs_btnode_delete_page+0x27/0x2d [nilfs2] > [<e0e5aa0a>] nilfs_btnode_cache_clear+0x7e/0x91 [nilfs2] > [<e0e58380>] nilfs_clear_inode+0x87/0x9a [nilfs2] > [<c0176ca3>] clear_inode+0x6c/0xba > [<e0e556e5>] nilfs_free_inode+0x17/0x28 [nilfs2] > [<e0e55959>] nilfs_delete_inode+0xd0/0x10f [nilfs2] > [<c0175d23>] d_delete+0x5d/0xe3 > [<e0e55889>] nilfs_delete_inode+0x0/0x10f [nilfs2] > [<c0177122>] generic_delete_inode+0x71/0xee > [<c0176636>] iput+0x60/0x62 > [<c016e80e>] do_unlinkat+0xbe/0xfe > [<c01656b1>] vfs_write+0x114/0x124 > [<c0165763>] sys_write+0x41/0x67 > [<c0103e4e>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb > ======================= > Code: 2f df 53 89 c3 8b 00 a8 01 75 04 0f 0b eb fe 83 7b 10 00 74 04 0f 0b eb > fe 8b 03 f6 c4 08 74 0f 89 d8 e8 33 9a 32 df 85 c0 75 04 <0f> 0b eb fe 89 d8 > 5b eb bc 55 57 56 53 83 ec 20 85 c0 c7 44 24 > EIP: [<e0e58cff>] nilfs_free_buffer_page+0x29/0x32 [nilfs2] SS:ESP > 0068:cfc71e58 > ---[ end trace bdf0e0f308ae752d ]--- > > Yes, its 2.0.0 because of the 2.0.1 incompatiblity. If its in 2.0.1 fixed, > disregard this ;). > > Alex
Whoa, it seems to be a new bug! This one seems rather tough. :( OK, I'll review it before releasing the version 2.0.2. Anyway, thanks for sending the log. Regards, -- Ryusuke Konishi NILFS team NTT http://www.nilfs.org/ _______________________________________________ users mailing list [email protected] https://www.nilfs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
