Re: btrfs: kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/extent_io.c:676!

On 10/14/2014 02:31 AM, Chris Mason wrote: > On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 10:15 PM, Sasha Levin wrote: >> Ping? >> >> This BUG_ON()ing due to GFP_ATOMIC allocation failure is really silly :( > > Agreed, I have a patch for this in testing. It didn't make my first pull but > I'll get it fixed up. I'v

Re: btrfs: kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/extent_io.c:676!

On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 10:15 PM, Sasha Levin wrote: Ping? This BUG_ON()ing due to GFP_ATOMIC allocation failure is really silly :( Agreed, I have a patch for this in testing. It didn't make my first pull but I'll get it fixed up. -chris -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line

Re: btrfs: kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/extent_io.c:676!

Ping? This BUG_ON()ing due to GFP_ATOMIC allocation failure is really silly :( On 03/23/2014 09:26 PM, Sasha Levin wrote: > Hi all, > > While fuzzing with trinity inside KVM tools guest running latest -next kernel > I've stumbled on the following spew. > > This is a result of a failed allocatio

btrfs: kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/extent_io.c:676!

Hi all, While fuzzing with trinity inside KVM tools guest running latest -next kernel I've stumbled on the following spew. This is a result of a failed allocation in alloc_extent_state_atomic() which triggers a BUG_ON when the return value is NULL. It's a bit weird that it BUGs on failed allocat