Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754825Ab3EMJx5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 May 2013 05:53:57 -0400 Received: from mailout4.samsung.com ([203.254.224.34]:37830 "EHLO mailout4.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753274Ab3EMJxz (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 May 2013 05:53:55 -0400 X-AuditID: cbfee68d-b7f096d0000043fc-b2-5190b8170871 Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 09:53:27 +0000 (GMT) From: EUNBONG SONG Subject: Re: Re: Re: EXT4 panic at jbd2_journal_put_journal_head() in 3.9+ To: Zheng Liu , Tony Luck Cc: Dmitry Monakhov , "Theodore Ts'o" , "linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Reply-to: eunb.song@samsung.com MIME-version: 1.0 X-MTR: 20130513095010510@eunb.song Msgkey: 20130513095010510@eunb.song X-EPLocale: ko_KR.euc-kr X-Priority: 3 X-EPWebmail-Msg-Type: personal X-EPWebmail-Reply-Demand: 0 X-EPApproval-Locale: X-EPHeader: ML X-EPTrCode: X-EPTrName: X-MLAttribute: X-RootMTR: 20130513095010510@eunb.song X-ParentMTR: X-ArchiveUser: X-CPGSPASS: N Content-type: text/plain; charset=euc-kr MIME-version: 1.0 Message-id: <12945098.35291368438804981.JavaMail.weblogic@epv6ml07> X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFprAKsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsVy+t8zPV3xHRMCDR5O17G4vGsOmwOjx+dN cgGMUVw2Kak5mWWpRfp2CVwZ7+/9YS24xVOxZNdypgbGNTxdjJwcQgIqEi3/vzOC2BICJhI3 L56CssUkLtxbz9bFyAVUs4xR4sPVdlaYonXPV7NDJOYzSvzad58JJMEioCrx8dlFdhCbTUBb 4u2XB2ANwgJeEq1rPrGB2CICvhKLz75jAmlmFjjLKLHl4R4WiDPkJSafvgzWzCsgKHFy5hMW iG1KEle/PmSBiCtLbDnfxQ4Rl5CYNf0C1EW8EjPan0LVy0lM+7qGGcKWljg/awPcO4u/P4aK 80scu70D6AgOsN4n94Nhxuze/IUNwhaQmHrmIFSrusSZy++g1vJJrFn4lgVmzK5Ty5lheu9v mQsOB2YBRYkp3Q/ZIWwtiS8/9rGhe4tXwFli68d/rBMYlWchSc1C0j4LSTuymgWMLKsYRVML kguKk9KLDPWKE3OLS/PS9ZLzczcxQlJD7w7G2wesDzEmA+NkIrOUaHI+MLXklcQbGpsZWZia mBobmVuakSasJM6r1mIdKCSQnliSmp2aWpBaFF9UmpNafIiRiYNTqoGRvfq4yi6+aSUnVreK nis9zK62qtHrepbCZxfJI6/aqm7UPm6u/6+x787sRge+vF2BlVx+y1x08h7MqZDyLtA+dazr usbnXzc+TQpIKxHffLX97sIPK1/Kpbc79m5lPf7n1qLX2qU78tYcdD7PJXNe2fPVWz+mogpR 7XstL4oWGs7iFzj3/CyvEktxRqKhFnNRcSIAHer+OSMDAAA= X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFmpmk+LIzCtJLcpLzFFi42I5/e/2DF3xHRMCDSb907C4vGsOmwOjx+dN cgGMURk2GamJKalFCql5yfkpmXnptkrewfHO8aZmBoa6hpYW5koKeYm5qbZKLj4Bum6ZOUBD lRTKEnNKgUIBicXFSvp2NkX5pSWpChn5xSW2StFGBsZ6RqYmekbGBnomBrFWhgYGRqZAVQkZ Ge/v/WEtuMVTsWTXcqYGxjU8XYycHEICKhIt/78zgtgSAiYS656vZoewxSQu3FvP1sXIBVQz n1Hi1777TCAJFgFViY/PLoIVsQloS7z98oAVxBYW8JJoXfOJDcQWEfCVWHz2HRNIM7PAWUaJ LQ/3sEBsk5eYfPoyWDOvgKDEyZlPWCC2KUlc/fqQBSKuLLHlfBfUFRISs6ZfYIWweSVmtD+F qpeTmPZ1DTOELS1xftYGRpirF39/DBXnlzh2ewfQERxgvU/uB8OM2b35CxuELSAx9cxBqFZ1 iTOX30Gt5ZNYs/AtC8yYXaeWM8P03t8yFxwOzAKKElO6H7JD2FoSX37sY0P3Fq+As8TWj/9Y JzDKzUKSmoWkfRaSdmQ1CxhZVjGKphYkFxQnpVcY6xUn5haX5qXrJefnbmIEJ6lni3cw/j9v fYhRgINRiYfXQ3FCoBBrYllxZe4hRgkOZiURXsvNQCHelMTKqtSi/Pii0pzU4kOMycAYnMgs JZqcD0ygeSXxhsYGxoaGluYGpoZGFqQJK4nzPmu1DhQSSE8sSc1OTS1ILYLZwsTBKdXAaJ58 M6b4UoGC3hbWtWcOd7qY96e3rHw9q46v9cFv7uaHyXpfflbsMLE+/VjmVIr+sfDq9eb10SGv 592S3Cxd0qQayq/o3M5o3b98T1Xb4aaz5S+MOQ95mHe6xTrH1V3LLzFR+7SN1zHct36y4umj M+yyPv9nfn4q+7NZFtdvQ+6I+kjuj8ZKLMUZiYZazEXFiQDyDg0BlgMAAA== DLP-Filter: Pass X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by mail.home.local id r4D9s3b4032671 Content-Length: 1317 Lines: 27 > Hi all, > First of all I couldn't reproduce this regression in my sand box. So > the following speculation is only my guess. I suspect that the commit > (ae4647fb) isn't root cause. It just uncover a potential bug that has > been there for a long time. I look at the code, and found two > suspicious stuff in jbd2. The first one is in do_get_write_access(). > In this function we forgot to lock bh state when we check b_jlist == > BJ_Shadow. I generate a patch to fix it, and I really think it is the > root cause. Further, in __journal_remove_journal_head() we check > b_jlist == BJ_None. But, when this function is called, bh state won't > be locked sometimes. So I suspect this is why we hit a BUG in > jbd2_journal_put_journal_head(). But I don't have a good solution to > fix this until now because I don't know whether we need to lock bh state > here, or maybe we should remove this assertation. > > So, generally, Tony, Eunbong, could you please try the following patch? > > Thanks in advance, > - Zheng Hi, I tested your patch. Unfortunately, the same problem was reproduced. Thanks. ????{.n?+???????+%?????ݶ??w??{.n?+????{??G?????{ay?ʇڙ?,j??f???h?????????z_??(?階?ݢj"???m??????G????????????&???~???iO???z??v?^?m???? ????????I?