From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753334AbbDQXpq (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Apr 2015 19:45:46 -0400 Received: from ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net ([150.101.137.129]:28968 "EHLO ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751396AbbDQXpp (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Apr 2015 19:45:45 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A2D9CQComjFVPM+HLHldgwyBLoZErgcBAQEBAQEGmS0CAgEBAoE5TQEBAQEBAQcBAQEBODuEIAEBAQMBJxMcIwULCAMYCSUPBSUDBxoTiCMHyFABAQEHAgEfGIV3hRqEDiNLB4QtAQSbP4EegzqQM4IGHgMZBIFjLDGCRAEBAQ Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2015 09:45:41 +1000 From: Dave Chinner To: Waiman Long Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com, Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: 4.0 kernel XFS filesystem crash when running AIM7's disk workload Message-ID: <20150417234541.GG21261@dastard> References: <55314529.7060202@hp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <55314529.7060202@hp.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 01:38:49PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > Hi Dave, > > When I was running the AIM7's disk workload on a 8-socket > Westmere-EX server with 4.0 kernel, the kernel crash. A set of small > ramdisks were created (ramdisk_size=271072). Those ramdisks were > formatted with XFS filesystem before the test began. The kernel log > was: > > XFS (ram12): Mounting V4 Filesystem > XFS (ram12): Log size 1424 blocks too small, minimum size is 1596 blocks > XFS (ram12): Log size out of supported range. Continuing onwards, > but if log hangs are > experienced then please report this message in the bug report. First thing you need to do is upgrade xfsprogs so that this message goes away. or use "mkfs.xfs -l size=10m" so that the log is larger than the minimum. > XFS (ram15): Ending clean mount > BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at (null) > IP: [] __memcpy+0xd/0x110 > PGD 29f7655f067 PUD 29f75a80067 PMD 0 > Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP > Modules linked in: xfs exportfs libcrc32c ebtable_nat ebtables > xt_CHECKSUM iptable_mangle bridge stp llc autofs4 ipt_REJECT > nf_reject_ipv4 nf_conntrack_ipv4 nf_defrag_ipv4 iptable_filter > ip_tables ip6t_REJECT nf_reject_ipv6 nf_conntrack_ipv6 > nf_defrag_ipv6 xt_state nf_conntrack ip6table_filter ip6_tables ipv6 > vhost_net macvtap macvlan vhost tun kvm_intel kvm ipmi_si > ipmi_msghandler tpm_infineon iTCO_wdt iTCO_vendor_support wmi > acpi_cpufreq microcode pcspkr serio_raw qlcnic be2net vxlan > udp_tunnel ip6_udp_tunnel ses enclosure igb dca ptp pps_core lpc_ich > mfd_core hpilo hpwdt sg i7core_edac edac_core netxen_nic ext4(E) > jbd2(E) mbcache(E) sr_mod(E) cdrom(E) sd_mod(E) lpfc(E) qla2xxx(E) > scsi_transport_fc(E) pata_acpi(E) ata_generic(E) ata_piix(E) hpsa(E) > radeon(E) ttm(E) drm_kms_helper(E) drm(E) i2c_algo_bit(E) > i2c_core(E) dm_mirror(E) dm_region_hash(E) dm_log(E) dm_mod(E) Why do you have a mix of signed and unsigned modules loaded? > CPU: 69 PID: 116603 Comm: xfsaild/ram5 Tainted: G E 4.0.0 #2 > Hardware name: HP ProLiant DL980 G7, BIOS P66 07/30/2012 > task: ffff8b9f7eeb4f80 ti: ffff8b9f7f1ac000 task.ti: ffff8b9f7f1ac000 > RIP: 0010:[] [] __memcpy+0xd/0x110 > RSP: 0018:ffff8b9f7f1afc10 EFLAGS: 00010206 > RAX: ffff88102476a3cc RBX: ffff889ff2ab5000 RCX: 0000000000000005 > RDX: 0000000000000006 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: ffff88102476a3cc edx = 6 bytes. > RBP: ffff8b9f7f1afc18 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: ffff88102476a3cc > R10: ffff8a1f6c03ea80 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: ffff8b1ff1269400 > R13: ffff8b1f64837c98 R14: ffff881038701200 R15: ffff88102476a300 > FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff8b1fffa40000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 > CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 000000008005003b > CR2: 0000000000000000 CR3: 0000029f7655e000 CR4: 00000000000006e0 > Stack: > ffffffffa0ca8c41 ffff8b9f7f1afc68 ffffffffa0cc4803 ffff8b9f7f1afc68 > ffffffffa0cd2777 ffff8b9f7f1afc68 ffff8b1ff1269400 ffff8a9f59022800 > ffff8b1f7c932718 0000000000000003 ffff8a9f590228e4 ffff8b9f7f1afce8 > Call Trace: > [] ? xfs_iflush_fork+0x181/0x240 [xfs] > [] xfs_iflush_int+0x1f3/0x320 [xfs] > [] ? kmem_alloc+0x87/0x100 [xfs] > [] xfs_iflush_cluster+0x295/0x380 [xfs] > [] xfs_iflush+0xf4/0x1f0 [xfs] > [] xfs_inode_item_push+0xea/0x130 [xfs] > [] xfsaild_push+0x10d/0x500 [xfs] > [] ? lock_timer_base+0x70/0x70 > [] xfsaild+0x98/0x130 [xfs] > [] ? xfsaild_push+0x500/0x500 [xfs] > [] ? xfsaild_push+0x500/0x500 [xfs] > [] ? xfsaild_push+0x500/0x500 [xfs] > [] ? kthread_freezable_should_stop+0x70/0x70 > [] ret_from_fork+0x58/0x90 > [] ? kthread_freezable_should_stop+0x70/0x70 > Code: 0f b6 c0 5b c9 c3 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 e8 2b f9 ff ff 80 7b > 25 00 74 c8 eb d3 90 90 90 48 89 f8 48 89 d1 48 c1 e9 03 83 e2 07 > 48 a5 89 d1 f3 a4 c3 20 4c 8b 06 4c 8b 4e 08 4c 8b 56 10 4c > RIP [] __memcpy+0xd/0x110 > RSP > CR2: 0000000000000000 > ---[ end trace fb8a4add69562a76 ]--- > > The xfs_iflush_fork+0x181/0x240 (385) IP address is at: > (rearrange slightly to make more sense) > 823 case XFS_DINODE_FMT_LOCAL: > 824 if ((iip->ili_fields & dataflag[whichfork]) && > 0x00000000000023c0 <+336>: movslq %ecx,%rcx > 0x00000000000023c3 <+339>: movswl 0x0(%rcx,%rcx,1),%eax > 0x00000000000023cb <+347>: test %eax,0x90(%rdx) > 0x00000000000023d1 <+353>: je 0x2350 > > 825 (ifp->if_bytes > 0)) { > 0x00000000000023d7 <+359>: mov (%r10),%edx > 0x00000000000023da <+362>: test %edx,%edx > 0x00000000000023dc <+364>: jle 0x2350 So the contents of rdx says that the inode fork size is 6 bytes in local format. The call location also indicates that it is the attribute fork that is in being flushed. The minimum size of the attr fork is 3 bytes - an empty header. However, then ext valid size has a second header that adds 4 bytes to the size, plus the bytes inteh attr name and value. Hence a size of 6 bytes is invalid, and probably indicates that there is some form of memory corruption going on here. IIRC, we haven't touched this code for a while - can you test 3.19 and see if it has the same problem? If it doesn't have the problem, and given you can reliably reproduce the crash, can you run a bisect to find the cause? FWIW, there's been a few dentry cache related crashes reported late in the 4.0-rc series that point to memory corruption as the cause of the panics, so I'm wondering if this is another symptom of the same problem.... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com