* verify key failure
@ 2018-05-14 14:35 Liu Bo
2018-05-14 16:10 ` Chris Mason
2018-05-15 1:29 ` Qu Wenruo
0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Liu Bo @ 2018-05-14 14:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Qu Wenruo; +Cc: linux-btrfs
Hi,
I got another warning of verify_level_key by running btrfs/124 in a loop, I'm testing against 4.17-rc3.
Not sure if it's false positive.
[101414.336691] WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 30194 at fs/btrfs/disk-io.c:455 btree_read_extent_buffer_pages+0x183/0x220 [btrfs]
[101414.340372] Modules linked in: btrfs(O) xor zstd_decompress zstd_compress xxhash zlib_inflate lzo_compress lzo_decompress zlib_deflate raid6_pq dm_flakey [last unloaded: xor]
[101414.345713] CPU: 3 PID: 30194 Comm: btrfs Tainted: G W O 4.17.0-rc3-liubo+ #35
[101414.348501] RIP: 0010:btree_read_extent_buffer_pages+0x183/0x220 [btrfs]
...
[101414.369713] Call Trace:
[101414.370477] read_tree_block+0x3d/0x60 [btrfs]
[101414.371946] read_block_for_search.isra.11+0x19c/0x350 [btrfs]
[101414.373915] btrfs_search_slot+0x4a0/0xa60 [btrfs]
[101414.375489] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x12/0x1c0
[101414.377080] ? btrfs_lookup_ordered_extent+0x8b/0xd0 [btrfs]
[101414.379007] btrfs_lookup_csum+0x42/0x130 [btrfs]
[101414.380456] __btrfs_lookup_bio_sums+0x2fb/0x6a0 [btrfs]
[101414.381554] btrfs_submit_bio_hook+0xbb/0x180 [btrfs]
[101414.382598] submit_one_bio+0x57/0x80 [btrfs]
[101414.383509] submit_extent_page+0xd5/0x1f0 [btrfs]
[101414.384507] __do_readpage+0x2a6/0x770 [btrfs]
[101414.385449] ? btrfs_create_repair_bio+0x100/0x100 [btrfs]
[101414.386576] ? btrfs_direct_IO+0x3a0/0x3a0 [btrfs]
[101414.387569] ? btrfs_direct_IO+0x3a0/0x3a0 [btrfs]
[101414.388562] __extent_readpages+0x2e2/0x330 [btrfs]
[101414.389584] extent_readpages+0x10e/0x1a0 [btrfs]
[101414.390565] __do_page_cache_readahead+0x283/0x340
[101414.391550] ? ondemand_readahead+0x207/0x460
[101414.392451] ondemand_readahead+0x207/0x460
[101414.393353] relocate_file_extent_cluster+0x364/0x4c0 [btrfs]
[101414.394546] relocate_block_group+0x5d4/0x6e0 [btrfs]
...
[101414.432616] BTRFS error (device sdb): tree first key mismatch detected, bytenr=30523392 key expected=(18446744073709551606, 128, 1120665600) has=(1, 204, 22020096)
thanks,
-liubo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: verify key failure
2018-05-14 14:35 verify key failure Liu Bo
@ 2018-05-14 16:10 ` Chris Mason
2018-05-15 12:06 ` Liu Bo
2018-05-15 1:29 ` Qu Wenruo
1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Chris Mason @ 2018-05-14 16:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Liu Bo; +Cc: Qu Wenruo, linux-btrfs
On 14 May 2018, at 10:35, Liu Bo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I got another warning of verify_level_key by running btrfs/124 in a
> loop, I'm testing against 4.17-rc3.
>
> Not sure if it's false positive.
How long does this take to trigger?
-chris
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: verify key failure
2018-05-14 16:10 ` Chris Mason
@ 2018-05-15 12:06 ` Liu Bo
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Liu Bo @ 2018-05-15 12:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chris Mason; +Cc: Liu Bo, Qu Wenruo, linux-btrfs
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 12:10 AM, Chris Mason <clm@fb.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 14 May 2018, at 10:35, Liu Bo wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I got another warning of verify_level_key by running btrfs/124 in a loop,
>> I'm testing against 4.17-rc3.
>>
>> Not sure if it's false positive.
>
>
> How long does this take to trigger?
>
btrfs/124 takes ~24s on my box, and it took 10 ~ 15 runs to hit.
thanks,
liubo
> -chris
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: verify key failure
2018-05-14 14:35 verify key failure Liu Bo
2018-05-14 16:10 ` Chris Mason
@ 2018-05-15 1:29 ` Qu Wenruo
2018-05-15 12:10 ` Liu Bo
1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Qu Wenruo @ 2018-05-15 1:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bo.liu; +Cc: linux-btrfs
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2430 bytes --]
On 2018年05月14日 22:35, Liu Bo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I got another warning of verify_level_key by running btrfs/124 in a loop, I'm testing against 4.17-rc3.
>
> Not sure if it's false positive.
>
> [101414.336691] WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 30194 at fs/btrfs/disk-io.c:455 btree_read_extent_buffer_pages+0x183/0x220 [btrfs]
> [101414.340372] Modules linked in: btrfs(O) xor zstd_decompress zstd_compress xxhash zlib_inflate lzo_compress lzo_decompress zlib_deflate raid6_pq dm_flakey [last unloaded: xor]
> [101414.345713] CPU: 3 PID: 30194 Comm: btrfs Tainted: G W O 4.17.0-rc3-liubo+ #35
> [101414.348501] RIP: 0010:btree_read_extent_buffer_pages+0x183/0x220 [btrfs]
> ...
> [101414.369713] Call Trace:
> [101414.370477] read_tree_block+0x3d/0x60 [btrfs]
> [101414.371946] read_block_for_search.isra.11+0x19c/0x350 [btrfs]
> [101414.373915] btrfs_search_slot+0x4a0/0xa60 [btrfs]
> [101414.375489] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x12/0x1c0
> [101414.377080] ? btrfs_lookup_ordered_extent+0x8b/0xd0 [btrfs]
> [101414.379007] btrfs_lookup_csum+0x42/0x130 [btrfs]
> [101414.380456] __btrfs_lookup_bio_sums+0x2fb/0x6a0 [btrfs]
> [101414.381554] btrfs_submit_bio_hook+0xbb/0x180 [btrfs]
> [101414.382598] submit_one_bio+0x57/0x80 [btrfs]
> [101414.383509] submit_extent_page+0xd5/0x1f0 [btrfs]
> [101414.384507] __do_readpage+0x2a6/0x770 [btrfs]
> [101414.385449] ? btrfs_create_repair_bio+0x100/0x100 [btrfs]
> [101414.386576] ? btrfs_direct_IO+0x3a0/0x3a0 [btrfs]
> [101414.387569] ? btrfs_direct_IO+0x3a0/0x3a0 [btrfs]
> [101414.388562] __extent_readpages+0x2e2/0x330 [btrfs]
> [101414.389584] extent_readpages+0x10e/0x1a0 [btrfs]
> [101414.390565] __do_page_cache_readahead+0x283/0x340
> [101414.391550] ? ondemand_readahead+0x207/0x460
> [101414.392451] ondemand_readahead+0x207/0x460
> [101414.393353] relocate_file_extent_cluster+0x364/0x4c0 [btrfs]
> [101414.394546] relocate_block_group+0x5d4/0x6e0 [btrfs]
> ...
> [101414.432616] BTRFS error (device sdb): tree first key mismatch detected, bytenr=30523392 key expected=(18446744073709551606, 128, 1120665600) has=(1, 204, 22020096)
The expected key is completely fine, while the found one obviously
belongs to extent tree.
Maybe that's the bug which I'm always chasing.
Can you reproduce it again with btrfs_print_tree() added to provide more
info?
Thanks,
Qu
>
> thanks,
> -liubo
>
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: verify key failure
2018-05-15 1:29 ` Qu Wenruo
@ 2018-05-15 12:10 ` Liu Bo
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Liu Bo @ 2018-05-15 12:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Qu Wenruo; +Cc: Liu Bo, linux-btrfs
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 9:29 AM, Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 2018年05月14日 22:35, Liu Bo wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I got another warning of verify_level_key by running btrfs/124 in a loop, I'm testing against 4.17-rc3.
>>
>> Not sure if it's false positive.
>>
>> [101414.336691] WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 30194 at fs/btrfs/disk-io.c:455 btree_read_extent_buffer_pages+0x183/0x220 [btrfs]
>> [101414.340372] Modules linked in: btrfs(O) xor zstd_decompress zstd_compress xxhash zlib_inflate lzo_compress lzo_decompress zlib_deflate raid6_pq dm_flakey [last unloaded: xor]
>> [101414.345713] CPU: 3 PID: 30194 Comm: btrfs Tainted: G W O 4.17.0-rc3-liubo+ #35
>> [101414.348501] RIP: 0010:btree_read_extent_buffer_pages+0x183/0x220 [btrfs]
>> ...
>> [101414.369713] Call Trace:
>> [101414.370477] read_tree_block+0x3d/0x60 [btrfs]
>> [101414.371946] read_block_for_search.isra.11+0x19c/0x350 [btrfs]
>> [101414.373915] btrfs_search_slot+0x4a0/0xa60 [btrfs]
>> [101414.375489] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x12/0x1c0
>> [101414.377080] ? btrfs_lookup_ordered_extent+0x8b/0xd0 [btrfs]
>> [101414.379007] btrfs_lookup_csum+0x42/0x130 [btrfs]
>> [101414.380456] __btrfs_lookup_bio_sums+0x2fb/0x6a0 [btrfs]
>> [101414.381554] btrfs_submit_bio_hook+0xbb/0x180 [btrfs]
>> [101414.382598] submit_one_bio+0x57/0x80 [btrfs]
>> [101414.383509] submit_extent_page+0xd5/0x1f0 [btrfs]
>> [101414.384507] __do_readpage+0x2a6/0x770 [btrfs]
>> [101414.385449] ? btrfs_create_repair_bio+0x100/0x100 [btrfs]
>> [101414.386576] ? btrfs_direct_IO+0x3a0/0x3a0 [btrfs]
>> [101414.387569] ? btrfs_direct_IO+0x3a0/0x3a0 [btrfs]
>> [101414.388562] __extent_readpages+0x2e2/0x330 [btrfs]
>> [101414.389584] extent_readpages+0x10e/0x1a0 [btrfs]
>> [101414.390565] __do_page_cache_readahead+0x283/0x340
>> [101414.391550] ? ondemand_readahead+0x207/0x460
>> [101414.392451] ondemand_readahead+0x207/0x460
>> [101414.393353] relocate_file_extent_cluster+0x364/0x4c0 [btrfs]
>> [101414.394546] relocate_block_group+0x5d4/0x6e0 [btrfs]
>> ...
>> [101414.432616] BTRFS error (device sdb): tree first key mismatch detected, bytenr=30523392 key expected=(18446744073709551606, 128, 1120665600) has=(1, 204, 22020096)
>
> The expected key is completely fine, while the found one obviously
> belongs to extent tree.
>
> Maybe that's the bug which I'm always chasing.
>
The following patch is already in 4.17-rc3,
btrfs: Fix wrong first_key parameter in replace_path
> Can you reproduce it again with btrfs_print_tree() added to provide more
> info?
>
Not sure if I'd have time working on this one, but I'll let you know
if I get it again.
My test box is nothing special, just a plain kvm VM.
thanks,
liubo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2018-05-15 12:10 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2018-05-14 14:35 verify key failure Liu Bo
2018-05-14 16:10 ` Chris Mason
2018-05-15 12:06 ` Liu Bo
2018-05-15 1:29 ` Qu Wenruo
2018-05-15 12:10 ` Liu Bo
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.