From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F0237F3F for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 18:02:07 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay1.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DCCB8F8065 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 16:02:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org (mail.linuxfoundation.org [140.211.169.12]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 5ytRAzhmPx7GUi0e for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 16:02:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 16:02:02 -0700 From: Greg KH Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: fix node forward in xfs_node_toosmall Message-ID: <20131010230202.GC4301@kroah.com> References: <20131009000926.GI10553@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20131009000926.GI10553@sgi.com> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Ben Myers Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 07:09:26PM -0500, Ben Myers wrote: > From: Mark Tinguely > > Commit f5ea1100 cleans up the disk to host conversions for > node directory entries, but because a variable is reused in > xfs_node_toosmall() the next node is not correctly found. > If the original node is small enough (<= 3/8 of the node size), > this change may incorrectly cause a node collapse when it should > not. That will cause an assert in xfstest generic/319: > > Assertion failed: first <= last && last < BBTOB(bp->b_length), > file: /root/newest/xfs/fs/xfs/xfs_trans_buf.c, line: 569 > > Keep the original node header to get the correct forward node. > > (When a node is considered for a merge with a sibling, it overwrites the > sibling pointers of the original incore nodehdr with the sibling's > pointers. This leads to loop considering the original node as a merge > candidate with itself in the second pass, and so it incorrectly > determines a merge should occur.) > > upstream commit 997def25e4b9cee3b01609e18a52f926bca8bd2b Applied to the 3.10 and 3.11 stable queues, thanks. greg k-h _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs