[Bug 200063] XFS corruption: mismatch between format (2) and size (0) in symlink

[Bug 200063] XFS corruption: mismatch between format (2) and size (0) in symlink

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=200063

--- Comment #4 from Zorro Lang (zlang@redhat.com) ---
I still can reproduce this bug on linux v4.20-rc1. So we haven't merged this
patch (in comment 3), right?

Phase 1 - find and verify superblock...
        - reporting progress in intervals of 15 minutes
Phase 2 - using internal log
        - zero log...
        - scan filesystem freespace and inode maps...
        - 14:10:29: scanning filesystem freespace - 16 of 16 allocation groups
done
        - found root inode chunk
Phase 3 - for each AG...
        - scan (but don't clear) agi unlinked lists...
        - 14:10:29: scanning agi unlinked lists - 16 of 16 allocation groups
done
        - process known inodes and perform inode discovery...
        - agno = 15
        - agno = 0
        - agno = 1
mismatch between format (2) and size (0) in symlink ino 125888517
bad data fork in symlink 125888517
would have cleared inode 125888517
        - agno = 2
        - agno = 3
        - agno = 4
        - agno = 5
        - agno = 6
        - agno = 7
        - agno = 8
        - agno = 9
        - agno = 10
        - agno = 11
        - agno = 12
        - agno = 13
        - agno = 14
        - 14:10:32: process known inodes and inode discovery - 50048 of 50048
inodes done
        - process newly discovered inodes...
        - 14:10:32: process newly discovered inodes - 16 of 16 allocation
groups done
Phase 4 - check for duplicate blocks...
        - setting up duplicate extent list...
        - 14:10:32: setting up duplicate extent list - 16 of 16 allocation
groups done
        - check for inodes claiming duplicate blocks...
        - agno = 0
        - agno = 13
        - agno = 2
        - agno = 3
        - agno = 5
        - agno = 4
        - agno = 6
        - agno = 7
        - agno = 9
        - agno = 11
        - agno = 10
        - agno = 8
        - agno = 14
        - agno = 12
        - agno = 15
        - agno = 1
mismatch between format (2) and size (0) in symlink ino 125888517
bad data fork in symlink 125888517
would have cleared inode 125888517
        - 14:10:32: check for inodes claiming duplicate blocks - 50048 of 50048
inodes done
No modify flag set, skipping phase 5
Phase 6 - check inode connectivity...
        - traversing filesystem ...
        - traversal finished ...
        - moving disconnected inodes to lost+found ...
Phase 7 - verify link counts...
        - 14:10:33: verify and correct link counts - 16 of 16 allocation groups
done

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.

Re: [Bug 200063] XFS corruption: mismatch between format (2) and size (0) in symlink

[Dave Chinner]

On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 01:31:26PM +0000, bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote:
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=200063
> 
> --- Comment #4 from Zorro Lang (zlang@redhat.com) ---
> I still can reproduce this bug on linux v4.20-rc1. So we haven't merged this
> patch (in comment 3), right?

Patch was superceded, and I never got around to posting the new
version. It's still sitting in my stack, I'll try to get it out in
the next coupel of days.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

[Bug 200063] XFS corruption: mismatch between format (2) and size (0) in symlink

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=200063

--- Comment #5 from Dave Chinner (david@fromorbit.com) ---
On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 01:31:26PM +0000, bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org
wrote:
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=200063
> 
> --- Comment #4 from Zorro Lang (zlang@redhat.com) ---
> I still can reproduce this bug on linux v4.20-rc1. So we haven't merged this
> patch (in comment 3), right?

Patch was superceded, and I never got around to posting the new
version. It's still sitting in my stack, I'll try to get it out in
the next coupel of days.

Cheers,

Dave.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.