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=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS 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 73617C04AB4 for ; Tue, 21 May 2019 17:57:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49322217D9 for ; Tue, 21 May 2019 17:57:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="uH9I6b0J" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728055AbfEUR5g (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 May 2019 13:57:36 -0400 Received: from mail-lj1-f195.google.com ([209.85.208.195]:45024 "EHLO mail-lj1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729156AbfEUR5f (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 May 2019 13:57:35 -0400 Received: by mail-lj1-f195.google.com with SMTP id e13so16647226ljl.11 for ; Tue, 21 May 2019 10:57:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=13iR66s35EeUhXp2Ectoi0OYdgpCcLBjgrRmPgISBoM=; b=uH9I6b0JCQbUYvD1LQ/glpe/cwjIy5fEvVhCo7mSI3nnWN8qaC32ctzL3bx4y9FHx1 8b6JffttjvceV7oO33hEAchiQ141RYZOda/yElKfLKngnwq7bfAIT8x1KuEn9d8sZAYm ArSJM9+nF6Zm+FJdKPJtCR4kBp/zvoi/e2Rqc+DZAlxoQLLHBSA18HY6yUjTMAWRUX38 WyPhja20hFXrXImDxpdjqmJTjoSwPIR54QrpmJE3SYs488Csl26LxlYhI5g8PNBDAVuw RSQ6ZxhJJqT0VbQ1ZfvEeaXUdXasb0L1jbiXU11exgVIx0Lv+whO/t376N1UiGC9ID/i S4DQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=13iR66s35EeUhXp2Ectoi0OYdgpCcLBjgrRmPgISBoM=; b=gckBFhrhYB2Nnhoh0tvAm8kg0cPYD1Tx+Aqjsy0sDVlJmODn7pfhKuoVejh++exgky HcwwFh7NtXOo7TkmNpb/2OaOP+pMQPv0Y7Rlms3+byCKIs/SeXVYLW5dEDoLuBDbq31l ig6CNTyRYN7/88+1FovQShi/04qDHzpiSDaOBKlAvbEPBaragFc8eTfhnJVZgTyvFz50 ydjsoyWiOc28YekfW5Mq1wHXAmSF16EBKJcuXbFECUHcPBqw68G7guoqv+raPZN65iZD ZlwzJw9leZQ8Iez7fWwzCToOhoJxdisJW0eaDASeyA32h8hzjuHG6C/jGdVEMEgefciL 3JSg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUcasFYxkbAyi4tdOUjMvVk0DaqfnJuivhz0FFeBZk3guMDTrpq i8aq2iIuw4mtKWz4nU58oq4pEbeAyxfrPNyYQnp/dA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxoVhtW6+H2OrjfsFNbhD7UYzdFtNxwmWLYrzO83Xt+JIlW+jv9qAzgJgpe0LduUYpYcryZKFWuLW7FD/A8aw8= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:7411:: with SMTP id p17mr26016219ljc.24.1558461453024; Tue, 21 May 2019 10:57:33 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190520115247.060821231@linuxfoundation.org> <20190520222342.wtsjx227c6qbkuua@xps.therub.org> <20190521085956.GC31445@kroah.com> <20190521093849.GA9806@kroah.com> <20190521162142.GA2591@mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <20190521162142.GA2591@mit.edu> From: Naresh Kamboju Date: Tue, 21 May 2019 23:27:21 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: ext4 regression (was Re: [PATCH 4.19 000/105] 4.19.45-stable review) To: "Theodore Ts'o" , Naresh Kamboju , Greg Kroah-Hartman , open list , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Guenter Roeck , Shuah Khan , patches@kernelci.org, Ben Hutchings , lkft-triage@lists.linaro.org, linux- stable , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Arthur Marsh , Richard Weinberger Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it, Jan Stancek Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 21 May 2019 at 21:52, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 03:58:15PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote: > > > Ted, any ideas here? Should I drop this from the stable trees, and you > > > revert it from Linus's? Or something else? > > It's safe to drop this from the stable trees while we investigate. It > was always borderline for stable anyway. (See below). > > > > > > > Note, I do also have 170417c8c7bb ("ext4: fix block validity checks for > > > journal inodes using indirect blocks") in the trees, which was supposed > > > to fix the problem with this patch, am I missing another one as well? > > > > FYI, > > I have applied fix patch 170417c8c7bb ("ext4: fix block validity checks for > > journal inodes using indirect blocks") but did not fix this problem. > > Hmm... are you _sure_? This bug was reported to me versus the > mainline, and the person who reported it confirmed that it did fix the > problem, he was seeing, and the symptoms are identical to yours. Can > you double check, please? I can't reproduce it either with that patch applied. This bug is specific to x86_64 and i386. Steps to reproduce is, running LTP three test cases in sequence on x86 device. # cd ltp/runtest # cat syscalls ( only three test case) open12 open12 madvise06 madvise06 poll02 poll02 # as Dan referring to, LTP is run using '/opt/ltp/runltp -d /scratch -f syscalls', where the syscalls file has been replaced with three test case names, and /scratch is an ext4 SATA drive. /scratch is created using 'mkfs -t ext4 /dev/disk/by-id/ata-TOSHIBA_MG03ACA100_37O9KGKWF' and mounted to /scratch. Please find full test log, https://lkft.validation.linaro.org/scheduler/job/738661#L1356 And you notice dmesg log, [ 53.897001] EXT4-fs error (device sda): ext4_find_extent:909: inode #8: comm jbd2/sda-8: pblk 121667583 bad header/extent: invalid extent entries - magic f30a, entries 8, max 340(340), depth 0(0) [ 53.931430] jbd2_journal_bmap: journal block not found at offset 49 on sda-8 [ 53.938480] Aborting journal on device sda-8. [ 55.431382] EXT4-fs error (device sda): ext4_journal_check_start:61: Detected aborted journal [ 55.439947] EXT4-fs (sda): Remounting filesystem read-only - Naresh