From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2106EC2BA83 for ; Fri, 14 Feb 2020 18:18:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E949B222C2 for ; Fri, 14 Feb 2020 18:18:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="C6Yspuzt" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2405185AbgBNSSm (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Feb 2020 13:18:42 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-2.mimecast.com ([205.139.110.61]:51664 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2405177AbgBNSSl (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Feb 2020 13:18:41 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1581704320; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=xGatBSxTmbi3SCLMY3Iax0T1D3mK/QaiiHyVZvgWjiQ=; b=C6Yspuzt8QNK6m9sOWfRn4jW7chjiuLa0Yd/o+TubZq88otMb6DtYC4NUj8LCuZ5cBxRS2 TRbfvzVeWbJyYQXc544pQXtCgzrsv1VrYeVD9nD1xVKwG+5vR5KGs50n5d1uFczyqmkVhq Fb+GpKK/SG1gYZIivk8GXapzqlmhEsQ= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-254-S4psMR2xM_-FJYOL0vCn7Q-1; Fri, 14 Feb 2020 13:18:33 -0500 X-MC-Unique: S4psMR2xM_-FJYOL0vCn7Q-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 27CEF8017CC; Fri, 14 Feb 2020 18:18:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bfoster (dhcp-41-2.bos.redhat.com [10.18.41.2]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C1ED390094; Fri, 14 Feb 2020 18:18:31 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 13:18:30 -0500 From: Brian Foster To: bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Bug 206397] [xfstests generic/475] XFS: Assertion failed: iclog->ic_state == XLOG_STATE_ACTIVE, file: fs/xfs/xfs_log.c, line: 572 Message-ID: <20200214181830.GA20865@bfoster> References: <20200212155510.GC17921@bfoster> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200212155510.GC17921@bfoster> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.13 Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 10:55:10AM -0500, Brian Foster wrote: > On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 05:10:05PM +0000, bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote: > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=206397 > > > > --- Comment #2 from Zorro Lang (zlang@redhat.com) --- > > (In reply to Chandan Rajendra from comment #1) > > > I was unable to recreate this issue on a ppc64le kvm guest. I used Linux > > > v5.5 and xfsprogs' for-next branch. > > > > > > Can you please share the kernel config file? Also, Can you please tell me > > > how easy is it recreate this bug? > > > > It's really hard to reproduce. The g/475 is a random test, it's helped us to > > find many different issues. For this bug, this's the 1st time I hit it, and > > can't reproduce it simply. > > > > Have you still been unable to reproduce (assuming you've been attempting > to)? How many iterations were required before you reproduced the first > time? > > I'm wondering if the XLOG_STATE_IOERROR check in xfs_log_release_iclog() > is racy with respect to filesystem shutdown. There's an ASSERT_ALWAYS() > earlier in this (xlog_cil_push()) codepath that checks for ACTIVE || > WANT_SYNC and it doesn't appear that has failed from your output > snippet. The aforementioned IOERROR check occurs before we acquire > ->l_icloglock, however, which I think means xfs_log_force_umount() could > jump in if called from another task and reset all of the iclogs while > the release path waits on the lock. > FWIW, I wasn't able to reproduce after a day or so of iterating generic/475, but I was able to confirm that the check referenced above is racy. The problem looks like a minor oversight in commit df732b29c8 ("xfs: call xlog_state_release_iclog with l_icloglock held"). I've floated a patch here: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20200214181528.24046-1-bfoster@redhat.com/ Brian > Brian > > > -- > > You are receiving this mail because: > > You are watching the assignee of the bug. > > >