Re: test12: innd bug came back?
Alexander Viro wrote: > > On Sun, 17 Dec 2000, Jorg de Jong wrote: > > > > >On 13 Dec 2000, Henrik [ISO-8859-1] Strner wrote: > > > > > > > >> Just to add a "me too" on this. I didn't report when I saw it last week, > > > > I'd like to second that. ME TOO ! > > Since I switched to 2.4.0.test12 I again have the innd bug. > > ( well at least the same symptoms !) > > I.e. old contents resurfacing in active? I tryed your test program and got correct results, a file with bytes 11-16385 being zero. I will try to give a description of my problems: after a reboot inn is 're-using' existing messages to store new messages. It seems that after a renumber command the active file is correced again. I have not checked to see if the active file was corrutped before. I am using a plain stock kernel, no other patches what so ever, but am using LVM. The blocksize the ext2 filesystem is using is 1024. -- Jorg de Jong Work : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Play : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: test12: innd bug came back?
On 17 Dec 2000, Henrik [ISO-8859-1] Størner wrote: > In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Alexander Viro ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >On Sun, 17 Dec 2000, Jorg de Jong wrote: > > >> > >On 13 Dec 2000, Henrik [ISO-8859-1] Størner wrote: > >> > > > >> > >> Just to add a "me too" on this. I didn't report when I saw it last week > > >> I'd like to second that. ME TOO ! > >> Since I switched to 2.4.0.test12 I again have the innd bug. > >> ( well at least the same symptoms !) > > >Guys, what blocksize are you using? > > I am using Reiserfs, and I hear it has some problems with the changes > introduced in pre12. So I will report back once the Reiserfs guys get > this settled. Ok, the reiserfs patches for test12 are on ftp.reiserfs.org/pub/2.4/beta, please let me know if they work for you. I just reran the test case on test12, with tails on and off and got the correct results. There might be some interaction with the new O_SYNC code I'm missing that is causing innd problems though (reiserfs still isn't using the new sync stuff, workin on it). -chris - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: test12: innd bug came back?
Alexander Viro wrote: On Sun, 17 Dec 2000, Jorg de Jong wrote: On 13 Dec 2000, Henrik [ISO-8859-1] Strner wrote: Just to add a "me too" on this. I didn't report when I saw it last week, I'd like to second that. ME TOO ! Since I switched to 2.4.0.test12 I again have the innd bug. ( well at least the same symptoms !) I.e. old contents resurfacing in active? I tryed your test program and got correct results, a file with bytes 11-16385 being zero. I will try to give a description of my problems: after a reboot inn is 're-using' existing messages to store new messages. It seems that after a renumber command the active file is correced again. I have not checked to see if the active file was corrutped before. I am using a plain stock kernel, no other patches what so ever, but am using LVM. The blocksize the ext2 filesystem is using is 1024. -- Jorg de Jong Work : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Play : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: test12: innd bug came back?
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Alexander Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >On Sun, 17 Dec 2000, Jorg de Jong wrote: >> > >On 13 Dec 2000, Henrik [ISO-8859-1] Størner wrote: >> > > >> > >> Just to add a "me too" on this. I didn't report when I saw it last week >> I'd like to second that. ME TOO ! >> Since I switched to 2.4.0.test12 I again have the innd bug. >> ( well at least the same symptoms !) >Guys, what blocksize are you using? I am using Reiserfs, and I hear it has some problems with the changes introduced in pre12. So I will report back once the Reiserfs guys get this settled. -- Henrik Storner | "Crackers thrive on code secrecy. Cockcroaches breed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | in the dark. It's time to let the sunlight in." | | Eric S. Raymond, re. the Frontpage backdoor - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: test12: innd bug came back?
On Sun, 17 Dec 2000, Jorg de Jong wrote:
> > >On 13 Dec 2000, Henrik [ISO-8859-1] Størner wrote:
> > >
> > >> Just to add a "me too" on this. I didn't report when I saw it last week,
>
> I'd like to second that. ME TOO !
> Since I switched to 2.4.0.test12 I again have the innd bug.
> ( well at least the same symptoms !)
Guys, what blocksize are you using? BTW, old testcase was
cat >foo.c <
main(argc,argv)
int argc;
char **argv;
{
int fd;
char c=0;
truncate(argv[1], 10);
fd = open(argv[1], 1);
lseek(fd, 16384, 0);
write(fd, , 1);
close(fd);
}
EOF
gcc foo.c
./a.out /tmp/something_old
od -c http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: test12: innd bug came back?
> >On 13 Dec 2000, Henrik [ISO-8859-1] Størner wrote: > > > >> Just to add a "me too" on this. I didn't report when I saw it last week, I'd like to second that. ME TOO ! Since I switched to 2.4.0.test12 I again have the innd bug. ( well at least the same symptoms !) No problems with test10 and test11. I have not used any pre kernels. regards -- Jorg de Jong Work : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Play : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: test12: innd bug came back?
On 13 Dec 2000, Henrik [ISO-8859-1] Størner wrote: Just to add a "me too" on this. I didn't report when I saw it last week, I'd like to second that. ME TOO ! Since I switched to 2.4.0.test12 I again have the innd bug. ( well at least the same symptoms !) No problems with test10 and test11. I have not used any pre kernels. regards -- Jorg de Jong Work : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Play : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: test12: innd bug came back?
On Sun, 17 Dec 2000, Jorg de Jong wrote:
On 13 Dec 2000, Henrik [ISO-8859-1] Størner wrote:
Just to add a "me too" on this. I didn't report when I saw it last week,
I'd like to second that. ME TOO !
Since I switched to 2.4.0.test12 I again have the innd bug.
( well at least the same symptoms !)
Guys, what blocksize are you using? BTW, old testcase was
cat foo.c EOF
#include unistd.h
main(argc,argv)
int argc;
char **argv;
{
int fd;
char c=0;
truncate(argv[1], 10);
fd = open(argv[1], 1);
lseek(fd, 16384, 0);
write(fd, c, 1);
close(fd);
}
EOF
gcc foo.c
./a.out /tmp/something_old
od -c /tmp/something_old
where something_old would be something not touched for long (i.e.
completely out of cache). Buggy kernels would leave much more than
10 non-zero bytes. Correct result is a file with bytes 11-16385 being zero.
I doubt that it would be the same beast, though...
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: test12: innd bug came back?
In [EMAIL PROTECTED] Alexander Viro [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sun, 17 Dec 2000, Jorg de Jong wrote: On 13 Dec 2000, Henrik [ISO-8859-1] Størner wrote: Just to add a "me too" on this. I didn't report when I saw it last week I'd like to second that. ME TOO ! Since I switched to 2.4.0.test12 I again have the innd bug. ( well at least the same symptoms !) Guys, what blocksize are you using? I am using Reiserfs, and I hear it has some problems with the changes introduced in pre12. So I will report back once the Reiserfs guys get this settled. -- Henrik Storner | "Crackers thrive on code secrecy. Cockcroaches breed [EMAIL PROTECTED] | in the dark. It's time to let the sunlight in." | | Eric S. Raymond, re. the Frontpage backdoor - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: test12: innd bug came back?
And the problem started with pre8 not final. currently investigating difference pre7-pre8 Albert Linus Torvalds wrote: > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > Alexander Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >On 13 Dec 2000, Henrik [ISO-8859-1] Størner wrote: > > > >> Just to add a "me too" on this. I didn't report when I saw it last week, > >> because I was uncertain of exactly what might have caused it - I was > >> booting several different kernels at the time, including one from a > >> rescue disk (I was trying to salvage bits of a Win9x disk at the time - > >> don't ask for details!) > >> > >> Alas, I lost the test program someone wrote to test for the truncate > >> problem, and due to moving I will not be able to test anything until > >> next Monday. But if needed, I can do some testing then. Something > >> definitely went wrong with innd during the test12 pre-patches. > > > >It may be a side effect of removing partial_clear() in test12-final. > > No. If you read the code, partial_clear() has been a no-op for the > longest time (the "start & ~PAGE_MASK" thing could never trigger, as > "start" has been page-aligned for a long long while now. > > So it must be something else. > > Linus > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ -- Albert Cranford Deerfield Beach FL USA [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: test12: innd bug came back?
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Alexander Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >On 13 Dec 2000, Henrik [ISO-8859-1] Størner wrote: > >> Just to add a "me too" on this. I didn't report when I saw it last week, >> because I was uncertain of exactly what might have caused it - I was >> booting several different kernels at the time, including one from a >> rescue disk (I was trying to salvage bits of a Win9x disk at the time - >> don't ask for details!) >> >> Alas, I lost the test program someone wrote to test for the truncate >> problem, and due to moving I will not be able to test anything until >> next Monday. But if needed, I can do some testing then. Something >> definitely went wrong with innd during the test12 pre-patches. > >It may be a side effect of removing partial_clear() in test12-final. No. If you read the code, partial_clear() has been a no-op for the longest time (the "start & ~PAGE_MASK" thing could never trigger, as "start" has been page-aligned for a long long while now. So it must be something else. Linus - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: test12: innd bug came back?
On 13 Dec 2000, Henrik [ISO-8859-1] Størner wrote:
> Just to add a "me too" on this. I didn't report when I saw it last week,
> because I was uncertain of exactly what might have caused it - I was
> booting several different kernels at the time, including one from a
> rescue disk (I was trying to salvage bits of a Win9x disk at the time -
> don't ask for details!)
>
> Alas, I lost the test program someone wrote to test for the truncate
> problem, and due to moving I will not be able to test anything until
> next Monday. But if needed, I can do some testing then. Something
> definitely went wrong with innd during the test12 pre-patches.
It may be a side effect of removing partial_clear() in test12-final.
Relevant chunk (in mm/memory.c):
@@ -953,10 +914,6 @@
/* Ok, partially affected.. */
start += diff << PAGE_SHIFT;
len = (len - diff) << PAGE_SHIFT;
- if (start & ~PAGE_MASK) {
- partial_clear(mpnt, start);
- start = (start + ~PAGE_MASK) & PAGE_MASK;
- }
flush_cache_range(mm, start, end);
zap_page_range(mm, start, len);
flush_tlb_range(mm, start, end);
should actually be
@@ -954,7 +915,6 @@
start += diff << PAGE_SHIFT;
len = (len - diff) << PAGE_SHIFT;
if (start & ~PAGE_MASK) {
- partial_clear(mpnt, start);
start = (start + ~PAGE_MASK) & PAGE_MASK;
}
flush_cache_range(mm, start, end);
IOW, we have off-by-one when calling zap_page_range() and friends.
Cheers,
Al
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: test12: innd bug came back?
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Anton Petrusevich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >Today I saw well-known "innd bug"(truncate(tm)), and my brother said >he had seen it with -test12-pre7. I don't know about -test12-pre3, >neither I nor my brother hadn't noticed it since -test10. But we could >miss it with -test12-pre3, and I didn't try any -test11 kernels. Thus >possibly that was introduced changes between -test12-pre3 and >-test12-pre7, but I can definitly say it present in -test12-final. Just to add a "me too" on this. I didn't report when I saw it last week, because I was uncertain of exactly what might have caused it - I was booting several different kernels at the time, including one from a rescue disk (I was trying to salvage bits of a Win9x disk at the time - don't ask for details!) Alas, I lost the test program someone wrote to test for the truncate problem, and due to moving I will not be able to test anything until next Monday. But if needed, I can do some testing then. Something definitely went wrong with innd during the test12 pre-patches. -- Henrik Storner | "Crackers thrive on code secrecy. Cockcroaches breed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | in the dark. It's time to let the sunlight in." | | Eric S. Raymond, re. the Frontpage backdoor - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: test12: innd bug came back?
In [EMAIL PROTECTED] Anton Petrusevich [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Today I saw well-known "innd bug"(truncate(tm)), and my brother said he had seen it with -test12-pre7. I don't know about -test12-pre3, neither I nor my brother hadn't noticed it since -test10. But we could miss it with -test12-pre3, and I didn't try any -test11 kernels. Thus possibly that was introduced changes between -test12-pre3 and -test12-pre7, but I can definitly say it present in -test12-final. Just to add a "me too" on this. I didn't report when I saw it last week, because I was uncertain of exactly what might have caused it - I was booting several different kernels at the time, including one from a rescue disk (I was trying to salvage bits of a Win9x disk at the time - don't ask for details!) Alas, I lost the test program someone wrote to test for the truncate problem, and due to moving I will not be able to test anything until next Monday. But if needed, I can do some testing then. Something definitely went wrong with innd during the test12 pre-patches. -- Henrik Storner | "Crackers thrive on code secrecy. Cockcroaches breed [EMAIL PROTECTED] | in the dark. It's time to let the sunlight in." | | Eric S. Raymond, re. the Frontpage backdoor - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: test12: innd bug came back?
On 13 Dec 2000, Henrik [ISO-8859-1] Størner wrote:
Just to add a "me too" on this. I didn't report when I saw it last week,
because I was uncertain of exactly what might have caused it - I was
booting several different kernels at the time, including one from a
rescue disk (I was trying to salvage bits of a Win9x disk at the time -
don't ask for details!)
Alas, I lost the test program someone wrote to test for the truncate
problem, and due to moving I will not be able to test anything until
next Monday. But if needed, I can do some testing then. Something
definitely went wrong with innd during the test12 pre-patches.
It may be a side effect of removing partial_clear() in test12-final.
Relevant chunk (in mm/memory.c):
@@ -953,10 +914,6 @@
/* Ok, partially affected.. */
start += diff PAGE_SHIFT;
len = (len - diff) PAGE_SHIFT;
- if (start ~PAGE_MASK) {
- partial_clear(mpnt, start);
- start = (start + ~PAGE_MASK) PAGE_MASK;
- }
flush_cache_range(mm, start, end);
zap_page_range(mm, start, len);
flush_tlb_range(mm, start, end);
should actually be
@@ -954,7 +915,6 @@
start += diff PAGE_SHIFT;
len = (len - diff) PAGE_SHIFT;
if (start ~PAGE_MASK) {
- partial_clear(mpnt, start);
start = (start + ~PAGE_MASK) PAGE_MASK;
}
flush_cache_range(mm, start, end);
IOW, we have off-by-one when calling zap_page_range() and friends.
Cheers,
Al
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: test12: innd bug came back?
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Alexander Viro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 13 Dec 2000, Henrik [ISO-8859-1] Størner wrote: Just to add a "me too" on this. I didn't report when I saw it last week, because I was uncertain of exactly what might have caused it - I was booting several different kernels at the time, including one from a rescue disk (I was trying to salvage bits of a Win9x disk at the time - don't ask for details!) Alas, I lost the test program someone wrote to test for the truncate problem, and due to moving I will not be able to test anything until next Monday. But if needed, I can do some testing then. Something definitely went wrong with innd during the test12 pre-patches. It may be a side effect of removing partial_clear() in test12-final. No. If you read the code, partial_clear() has been a no-op for the longest time (the "start ~PAGE_MASK" thing could never trigger, as "start" has been page-aligned for a long long while now. So it must be something else. Linus - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: test12: innd bug came back?
And the problem started with pre8 not final. currently investigating difference pre7-pre8 Albert Linus Torvalds wrote: In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Alexander Viro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 13 Dec 2000, Henrik [ISO-8859-1] Størner wrote: Just to add a "me too" on this. I didn't report when I saw it last week, because I was uncertain of exactly what might have caused it - I was booting several different kernels at the time, including one from a rescue disk (I was trying to salvage bits of a Win9x disk at the time - don't ask for details!) Alas, I lost the test program someone wrote to test for the truncate problem, and due to moving I will not be able to test anything until next Monday. But if needed, I can do some testing then. Something definitely went wrong with innd during the test12 pre-patches. It may be a side effect of removing partial_clear() in test12-final. No. If you read the code, partial_clear() has been a no-op for the longest time (the "start ~PAGE_MASK" thing could never trigger, as "start" has been page-aligned for a long long while now. So it must be something else. Linus - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ -- Albert Cranford Deerfield Beach FL USA [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
