All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Akira Fujita <a-fujita@rs.jp.nec.com>
To: "Lukáš Czerner" <lczerner@redhat.com>
Cc: Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>,
	ext4 development <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] ext4: i_size, EOFBLOCKS_FS corruption with xfstests 269
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:49:26 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5008E356.7070306@rs.jp.nec.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1207181137190.2291@dhcp-1-248.brq.redhat.com>

Hi Lukas,

> thanks for reporting this. Could you please try to use the most
> recent e2fsprogs ? The EOFBLOCKS_FL has been removed from e2fsprogs
> with:
>
> 010dc7b90d97b93907cbf57b3b44f1c1cad234f6 e2fsck: remove
> EXT4_EOFBLOCKS_FL flag handling

Thanks for comment, yes,
both e2fsck outputs I reported have gone with the latest e2fsprogs
(37c8db7b2078d0310e5676404e21cc143d8e4d56).

> and is about to be removed from kernel as well, so the EOFBLOCKS_FL
> problem probably does not even matter. Though the i_size problem
> might be real.

The patch also fixes i_size problem.
Because the last uninitialized extent (~~~ in below)
whose offset exceeds i_size and is not checked with the latest e2fsck.

# debugfs: stat <1237>
     Inode: 1237   Type: regular    Mode:  0666   Flags: 0x80000
     Generation: 2257700857    Version: 0x00000000:00000001
     User:  1870   Group:  1899   Size: 440021
     File ACL: 0    Directory ACL: 0
     Links: 1   Blockcount: 256
     Fragment:  Address: 0    Number: 0    Size: 0
      ctime: 0x5007a2a0:ee09d6a0 -- Thu Jul 19 15:01:04 2012
      atime: 0x5007a2ae:7dbe4e64 -- Thu Jul 19 15:01:18 2012
      mtime: 0x5007a2a0:ee09d6a0 -- Thu Jul 19 15:01:04 2012
     crtime: 0x5007a283:31ed0abc -- Thu Jul 19 15:00:35 2012
     Size of extra inode fields: 28
     EXTENTS:
     (12-38):49820-49846, (106):13714, (107):41292, (108-110[u]):41293-41295
                                                    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Regards,
Akira Fujita

(2012/07/18 18:40), Lukáš Czerner wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2012, Akira Fujita wrote:
>
>> Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 16:58:11 +0900
>> From: Akira Fujita <a-fujita@rs.jp.nec.com>
>> To: Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>
>> Cc: ext4 development <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
>> Subject: [BUG] ext4: i_size, EOFBLOCKS_FS corruption with xfstests 269
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I got a issue which makes i_size and EOFBLOCKS_FL corrupted
>> on ext4 with xfstests 269.
>> In my environment (linux-3.5-rc7), this can be reproduced
>> once of 10 times trial.
>>
>> Kernel: 3.5-rc7
>> Arch: x86_64
>>
>> Step and log are as bellow, after xfstests 269, e2fsck outputs
>> i_size and EOFBLOCKS_FL corruption.
>> Is this an already known issue?
>
> Hi Akira,
>
> thanks for reporting this. Could you please try to use the most
> recent e2fsprogs ? The EOFBLOCKS_FL has been removed from e2fsprogs
> with:
>
> 010dc7b90d97b93907cbf57b3b44f1c1cad234f6 e2fsck: remove
> EXT4_EOFBLOCKS_FL flag handling
>
> and is about to be removed from kernel as well, so the EOFBLOCKS_FL
> problem probably does not even matter. Though the i_size problem
> might be real.
>
> Not sure if it is a known problem, but I've certainly seen it before
> with xfstest 269, though I have not had time to look at this yet. So
> I guess I should :).
>
> Thanks!
> -Lukas
>
>>
>> # ./check 269
>>      FSTYP         -- ext4
>>      PLATFORM      -- Linux/x86_64 mcds1 3.5.0-rc7
>>      MKFS_OPTIONS  -- /dev/sdb3
>>      MOUNT_OPTIONS -- -o acl,user_xattr /dev/sdb3 /mnt/mp2
>>
>>      269 97s ... [failed, exit status 1] - output mismatch (see 269.out.bad)
>>      --- 269.out	2012-07-02 10:51:34.000000000 +0900
>>      +++ 269.out.bad	2012-07-18 14:09:03.000000000 +0900
>>      @@ -3,3 +3,4 @@
>>       Run fsstress
>>
>>       Run dd writers in parallel
>>      +_check_generic_filesystem: filesystem on /dev/sdb3 is inconsistent (see 269.full)
>>      Ran: 269
>>      Failures: 269
>>      Failed 1 of 1 tests
>>
>>
>>      # cat 269.full
>>        (snip)
>>
>>      e2fsck 1.41.12 (17-May-2010)
>>      Pass 1: Checking inodes, blocks, and sizes
>>      Inode 2336, i_size is 625045, should be 1277952.  Fix? no
>>
>>      Inode 3193 should not have EOFBLOCKS_FL set (size 1928717, lblk 218)
>>      Clear? no
>>
>>      Inode 4198 should not have EOFBLOCKS_FL set (size 380389, lblk 73)
>>      Clear? no
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Akira Fujita
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>
>

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

      reply	other threads:[~2012-07-20  4:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-07-18  7:58 [BUG] ext4: i_size, EOFBLOCKS_FS corruption with xfstests 269 Akira Fujita
2012-07-18  9:40 ` Lukáš Czerner
2012-07-20  4:49   ` Akira Fujita [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=5008E356.7070306@rs.jp.nec.com \
    --to=a-fujita@rs.jp.nec.com \
    --cc=lczerner@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.