On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 07:26:28AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 01:28:21AM -0600, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > Well the bad news is that the bug happened again overnight, even
> > though we were definitely using btrfs-progs with the 6eba90029 patch
> > added, _and_ it was do
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 01:28:21AM -0600, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> Well the bad news is that the bug happened again overnight, even
> though we were definitely using btrfs-progs with the 6eba90029 patch
> added, _and_ it was doing a sync + fsync between the mkfs and the
> mount.
This is good ju
Well the bad news is that the bug happened again overnight, even
though we were definitely using btrfs-progs with the 6eba90029 patch
added, _and_ it was doing a sync + fsync between the mkfs and the
mount.
Here is the log:
modprobe btrfs
[ 15.716610] Btrfs loaded
grep ^[[:space:]]*btrfs$ /proc
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 03:41:13PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 01:38:53PM -0600, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 08:38:08AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 03:00:12AM -0600, David Sterba wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 08:
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 01:38:53PM -0600, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 08:38:08AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 03:00:12AM -0600, David Sterba wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 08:33:57AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Oct 09, 2012
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 08:38:08AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 03:00:12AM -0600, David Sterba wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 08:33:57AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 08:20:02AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Oct 08, 2012
On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 03:00:12AM -0600, David Sterba wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 08:33:57AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 08:20:02AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 08:00:51PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > > > Ok, what's a rough i
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 10:22:30PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> Adding sync() + fsync of each /dev/sd* device after the mkfs command
> does appear to fix the problem.
>
> However it's a little bit difficult to know for sure because I might
> just be changing the timing of things by adding th
On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 11:16:57AM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 08:20:02AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > On my local machine, I'm reproducing this with what Fedora calls
> > 3.7.0-0.rc0.git2.4.fc19.x86_64 (note I found an unrelated but very
> > serious bug in this ker
On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 08:20:02AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On my local machine, I'm reproducing this with what Fedora calls
> 3.7.0-0.rc0.git2.4.fc19.x86_64 (note I found an unrelated but very
> serious bug in this kernel:
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=134973394826408&w=2 )
And i
On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 08:33:57AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 08:20:02AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 08:00:51PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > > Ok, what's a rough idea of the mainline git equiv of the buggy kernel?
> >
> > On my loca
On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 08:20:02AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 08:00:51PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 03:22:30PM -0600, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > >
> > > I have now reproduced this bug locally.
> > >
> > > Adding sync() + fsync of each
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 08:00:51PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 03:22:30PM -0600, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >
> > I have now reproduced this bug locally.
> >
> > Adding sync() + fsync of each /dev/sd* device after the mkfs command
> > does appear to fix the problem.
> >
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 03:22:30PM -0600, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> I have now reproduced this bug locally.
>
> Adding sync() + fsync of each /dev/sd* device after the mkfs command
> does appear to fix the problem.
>
> However it's a little bit difficult to know for sure because I might
> ju
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 04:15:14PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 11:04:19AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 08:57:30AM -0600, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 10:27:57AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Oct 08, 2012
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 06:42:27PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 04:15:14PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > Unfortunately I'm struggling to reproduce this outside of our build
> > system (Koji). I will keep you informed if I do manage to reproduce
> > it locally. Addin
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 04:15:14PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> Unfortunately I'm struggling to reproduce this outside of our build
> system (Koji). I will keep you informed if I do manage to reproduce
> it locally. Adding fsync /dev/sda1 was also my first instinct :-)
Have you updated the
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 09:15:14AM -0600, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 11:04:19AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 08:57:30AM -0600, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 10:27:57AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Oct 08, 2012
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 11:04:19AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 08:57:30AM -0600, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 10:27:57AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 08:16:42AM -0600, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I'm tracking
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 08:57:30AM -0600, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 10:27:57AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 08:16:42AM -0600, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm tracking this bug here:
> > >
> > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?i
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 10:27:57AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 08:16:42AM -0600, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >
> > I'm tracking this bug here:
> >
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=863978
> >
> > Since approx. last week I'm seeing lots of failures in btrfs.
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 08:16:42AM -0600, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> I'm tracking this bug here:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=863978
>
> Since approx. last week I'm seeing lots of failures in btrfs. The
> common factor seems to be that the filesystem is created (mkfs.btrfs
I'm tracking this bug here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=863978
Since approx. last week I'm seeing lots of failures in btrfs. The
common factor seems to be that the filesystem is created (mkfs.btrfs
/dev/sda1) and then it is immediately used -- eg. mounted or some
btrfs subtool
23 matches
Mail list logo