From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752690Ab0LJGwY (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Dec 2010 01:52:24 -0500 Received: from mail-bw0-f45.google.com ([209.85.214.45]:48117 "EHLO mail-bw0-f45.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751106Ab0LJGwX convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Dec 2010 01:52:23 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20101210023852.GB3059@thunk.org> References: <20101207182243.GB21112@redhat.com> <20101207193514.GA2921@thunk.org> <20101209180111.GF2921@thunk.org> <20101209201359.GG2921@thunk.org> <20101209231616.GA12515@basil.fritz.box> <1291945065-sup-1838@think> <20101210023852.GB3059@thunk.org> From: Jon Nelson Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 00:52:01 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: hunt for 2.6.37 dm-crypt+ext4 corruption? (was: Re: dm-crypt barrier support is effective) To: "Ted Ts'o" , Matt , Chris Mason , Andi Kleen , Jon Nelson , Mike Snitzer , Milan Broz , linux-btrfs , dm-devel , Linux Kernel , htd , htejun , linux-ext4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 8:38 PM, Ted Ts'o wrote: > On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 02:53:30AM +0100, Matt wrote: >> >> Try a kernel before 5a87b7a5da250c9be6d757758425dfeaf8ed3179 >> >> from the tests I've done that one showed the least or no corruption if >> you count the empty /etc/env.d/03opengl as an artefact > > Yes, that's a good test.  Also try commit bd2d0210cf.  The patch > series that is most likely to be at fault if there is a regression in > between 5a87b7a5d and bd2d0210cf inclusive. > > I did a lot of testing before submitting it, but that wa a tricky > rewrite.  If you can reproduce the problem reliably, it might be good > to try commit 16828088f9 (the commit before 5a87b7a5d) and commit > bd2d0210cf.  If it reliably reproduces on bd2d0210cf, but is clean on > 16828088f9, then it's my ext4 block i/o submission patches, and we'll > need to either figure out what's going on or back out that set of > changes. > > If that's the case, a bisect of those changes (it's only 6 commits, so > it shouldn't take long) would be most appreciated. I observed the behavior on bd2d0210cf in a qemu-kvm install of openSUSE 11.3 (x86_64) on *totally* different host - an AMD quad-core. I did /not/ observe the behavior on 16828088f9 (yet). I'll run the test a few more times on 1682.. Additionally, I am building a bisected kernel now ( cb20d5188366f04d96d2e07b1240cc92170ade40 ), but won't be able to get back at it for a while. I hope this helps. -- Jon