On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 04:23:50PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> Dave,
>
> >> This is an easily reproducible bug. And I further confirmed it in
> >> two ways:
> >>
> >> 1) turn off XFS, build 39 commits and boot them 2000+ times
> >>
> >> => no single mount error
> >
> >That doesn't tell you it is
Dave,
>> This is an easily reproducible bug. And I further confirmed it in
>> two ways:
>>
>> 1) turn off XFS, build 39 commits and boot them 2000+ times
>>
>> => no single mount error
>
>That doesn't tell you it is an XFS error. Absence of symptoms !=
>absence of bug.
True.
>> 2) turn off all o
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 02:03:34PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 03:28:20PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:38:34AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:33:00AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:26:3
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 02:23:13PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> Dave,
>
> Here are the first oops chunks that show up in the 3.12-rc4 kernel
> with only XFS build in. Attached is the kconfig and one full dmesg.
>
> Hope there are more clues in them. I'll further test whether the
> problems disapp
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 03:28:20PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:38:34AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:33:00AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:26:37AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > > > Dave,
> > > >
> > > > > I note
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:38:34AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:33:00AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:26:37AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > > Dave,
> > >
> > > > I note that you have CONFIG_SLUB=y, which means that the cache slabs
> > > > are
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:33:00AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:26:37AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > Dave,
> >
> > > I note that you have CONFIG_SLUB=y, which means that the cache slabs
> > > are shared with objects of other types. That means that the memory
> > > corr
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:26:37AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> Dave,
>
> > I note that you have CONFIG_SLUB=y, which means that the cache slabs
> > are shared with objects of other types. That means that the memory
> > corruption problem is likely to be caused by one of the other
> > filesystems
Dave,
> I note that you have CONFIG_SLUB=y, which means that the cache slabs
> are shared with objects of other types. That means that the memory
> corruption problem is likely to be caused by one of the other
> filesystems that is probing the block device(s), not XFS.
Good to know that, it would
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 09:41:17AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 09:16:40AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:59:00AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > [add x...@oss.sgi.com to cc]
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > To help debug the problem, I searched XFS in m
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 09:16:40AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:59:00AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > [add x...@oss.sgi.com to cc]
>
> Thanks.
>
> To help debug the problem, I searched XFS in my tests' oops database
> and find one kernel that failed 4 times (out of 12
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:59:00AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> [add x...@oss.sgi.com to cc]
Thanks.
To help debug the problem, I searched XFS in my tests' oops database
and find one kernel that failed 4 times (out of 12 total boots) with
basically the same error:
4 BUG: sleeping function
12 matches
Mail list logo
