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 942037F3F for ; Mon, 23 Sep 2013 16:45:32 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <5240B67B.3000305@sgi.com> Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 16:45:31 -0500 From: Mark Tinguely MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: fix node forward in xfs_node_toosmall References: <20130920220519.585903357@sgi.com> <5240B3F1.4040305@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5240B3F1.4040305@gmail.com> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: "Michael L. Semon" Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On 09/23/13 16:34, Michael L. Semon wrote: > On 09/20/2013 06:05 PM, Mark Tinguely wrote: >> 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. > > This works for xfstests generic/319 on 32-bit x86. The xfstests > run was okay, with a lockdep in the middle and a crash in xfs/300. > Neither the lockdep nor the crash could reproduced by running > individual tests one by one. > > generic/319 itself fails only because it couldn't find its > _cleanup routine. I'm not sure if I'm using v1 or v2 of > generic/319. > > The kernel is set to the commit just before the latest aio-next > merge, which is causing severe problems here. xfsprogs was the > latest production xfsprogs because my copy of xfstests is having > trouble checking v4 XFS filesystems otherwise. > > Will test xfs_node_toosmall patch v2 once I get home. > > Thanks! > > Michael > 319 v1 had the cleanup and removed in v2 because of feedback. IMO, it should be there even basically empty. --Mark. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs