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=-10.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING, NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable 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 D9A49C11F68 for ; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 17:26:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C01E161D90 for ; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 17:26:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234420AbhF2R2x (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Jun 2021 13:28:53 -0400 Received: from youngberry.canonical.com ([91.189.89.112]:45459 "EHLO youngberry.canonical.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233106AbhF2R2u (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Jun 2021 13:28:50 -0400 Received: from mail-ej1-f69.google.com ([209.85.218.69]) by youngberry.canonical.com with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from ) id 1lyHV8-0003RL-8I for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 17:26:22 +0000 Received: by mail-ej1-f69.google.com with SMTP id q14-20020a1709066aceb029049fa6bee56fso5966149ejs.21 for ; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 10:26:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=CgATo/cmzjIbxSXeweW5Qt4vSgo3cK7zBoFww9AqnFQ=; b=NAalVLqhBKTUtvksJXBbb9My5hRHIFB1+ZDg1BeiH6kirJ9q6qBAvSuM0Qqwl+3Wlx HcJEHZD2HOMg1nL3jCNhknmM4HUfK5nsoslQ5SsQyjrKkZNPmt27+jMMMSE7hNe3Q3GC gu6jKfs7zcLw6dfwKyNz1Ezei2qiifghah8SOwq0VRjH6WRc3SnTSU30fBRjpDQN2jT3 GQnVp0lxgRCggyZ8KPSm6CgkhRYa8Lwlp0XReNRJVwnvOVc8tFwnzMbVCyoweN3/L8Xl 4WFrkoPEga0T3QRgeWevDNvWRR+yJ25d0rFic9p3X9zuatcuzECumuSSR5kIQAOKhaLg aaVg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531WbG8lfLQ8ciWl6SXmXNHis/fN7hhmhWuT+uO3LdhMMq2OzMng xFoYVtgI04sAXJGEC0xAD2yHZs3ZOY2ljnvuUbWIMMiCdaR+BLcb4Rx0UnhkyDauOW71ezQa65f Qyt9FBI9shS25NlN1cL9JpvUQStKs029h6vRRACmL3A== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:7216:: with SMTP id dr22mr30019222ejc.405.1624987581056; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 10:26:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxpURBNXacLmaKH+LXsQxnewNjaG20VdoqP9cDm4aBy8K2f/rAsRT3GZavXdL1WUJ5i0r+vLA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:7216:: with SMTP id dr22mr30019213ejc.405.1624987580875; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 10:26:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.115] (xdsl-188-155-177-222.adslplus.ch. [188.155.177.222]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b27sm8444834ejl.10.2021.06.29.10.26.20 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 29 Jun 2021 10:26:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [BUG] btrfs potential failure on 32 core LTP test (fallocate05) To: Josef Bacik , Chris Mason , David Sterba , linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , "kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com" , "ltp@lists.linux.it" , Qu Wenruo , Filipe Manana References: <124d7ead-6600-f369-7af1-a1bc27df135c@toxicpanda.com> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski Message-ID: <667133e5-44cb-8d95-c40a-12ac82f186f0@canonical.com> Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2021 19:26:20 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <124d7ead-6600-f369-7af1-a1bc27df135c@toxicpanda.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 29/06/2021 19:24, Josef Bacik wrote: > On 6/29/21 1:00 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> Dear BTRFS folks, >> >> I am hitting a potential regression of btrfs, visible only with >> fallocate05 test from LTP (Linux Test Project) only on 32+ core Azure >> instances (x86_64). >> >> Tested: >> v5.8 (Ubuntu with our stable patches): PASS >> v5.11 (Ubuntu with our stable patches): FAIL >> v5.13 mainline: FAIL >> >> PASS means test passes on all instances >> FAIL means test passes on other instance types (e.g. 4 or 16 core) but >> fails on 32 and 64 core instances (did not test higher), >> e.g.: Standard_F32s_v2, Standard_F64s_v2, Standard_D32s_v3, >> Standard_E32s_v3 >> >> Reproduction steps: >> git clone https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp.git >> cd ltp >> ./build.sh && make install -j8 >> cd ../ltp-install >> sudo ./runltp -f syscalls -s fallocate05 >> >> Failure output: >> tst_test.c:1379: TINFO: Testing on btrfs >> tst_test.c:888: TINFO: Formatting /dev/loop4 with btrfs opts='' extra opts='' >> tst_test.c:1311: TINFO: Timeout per run is 0h 05m 00s >> tst_fill_fs.c:32: TINFO: Creating file mntpoint/file0 size 21710183 >> tst_fill_fs.c:32: TINFO: Creating file mntpoint/file1 size 8070086 >> tst_fill_fs.c:32: TINFO: Creating file mntpoint/file2 size 3971177 >> tst_fill_fs.c:32: TINFO: Creating file mntpoint/file3 size 36915315 >> tst_fill_fs.c:32: TINFO: Creating file mntpoint/file4 size 70310993 >> tst_fill_fs.c:32: TINFO: Creating file mntpoint/file5 size 4807935 >> tst_fill_fs.c:32: TINFO: Creating file mntpoint/file6 size 90739786 >> tst_fill_fs.c:32: TINFO: Creating file mntpoint/file7 size 76896492 >> tst_fill_fs.c:32: TINFO: Creating file mntpoint/file8 size 72228649 >> tst_fill_fs.c:32: TINFO: Creating file mntpoint/file9 size 36207821 >> tst_fill_fs.c:32: TINFO: Creating file mntpoint/file10 size 81483962 >> tst_fill_fs.c:59: TINFO: write(): ENOSPC (28) >> fallocate05.c:81: TPASS: write() wrote 65536 bytes >> fallocate05.c:102: TINFO: fallocate()d 0 extra blocks on full FS >> fallocate05.c:114: TPASS: fallocate() on full FS >> fallocate05.c:130: TPASS: fallocate(FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE | FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE) >> fallocate05.c:134: TFAIL: write(): ENOSPC (28) >> >> Test code: >> https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/blob/master/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fallocate/fallocate05.c#L134 >> >> See also: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-kernel-tests/+bug/1933112 >> >> Other FS tests succeed on that machines/kernels. Other file systems >> also pass - only btrfs fails. The issue was not bisected. Full test >> log attached. >> > > Also it looks like you're using a loop device, the instructions you gave me > aren't complete enough for me to reproduce. What is the actual setup you are > using? How big is your loop device? Is it a backing device? I had to do -b > to get the test to even start to run, but I've got a 2tib ssd, am I > supposed to be using something else? Thanks, The test takes care about loop device, nothing is needed from your side. Just run the test and wait till you see: "tst_test.c:1379: TINFO: Testing on btrfs" That's where the interesting part starts :) Best regards, Krzysztof