Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932407AbWLMBWP (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Dec 2006 20:22:15 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932524AbWLMBWP (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Dec 2006 20:22:15 -0500 Received: from ns.netcenter.hu ([195.228.254.57]:55249 "EHLO netcenter.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932407AbWLMBWN (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Dec 2006 20:22:13 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 588 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Tue, 12 Dec 2006 20:22:12 EST Message-ID: <00ab01c71e53$942af2f0$0400a8c0@dcccs> From: =?utf-8?Q?Haar_J=C3=A1nos?= To: "Justin Piszcz" Cc: , References: <003701c71d78$33ed28d0$0400a8c0@dcccs> Subject: Re: xfslogd-spinlock bug? Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 02:11:00 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1807 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 7250 Lines: 188 Hello, Justin, This is a 64bit system. But i cannot understand, what is the curious? :-) I am not a kernel developer, and not a C programmer, but the long pointers shows me, the 64 bit. Or am i on the wrong clue? :-) Anyway, this issue happens for me about daily, or max 2-3 day often. But i have no idea what cause this exactly. The 2.6.16.18 was stable for me a long time, and one day starts to tricking me, and happens more and more often. Thats why i thinking some bad part of the (14TB) FS on the disks. (this fs have a lot of errors, what the xfs_repair cannot be corrected, but anyway this is a productive system, and works well, except this issue. Some months before i have replaced the parity disk in one of the RAID4 array, and the next day, during the resync process, another one disk died. I almost lost everything, but thanks to the raid4, and mdadm, i have successfully recovered a lot of data with the 1 day older parity-only drive. This was really bad, and leave some scars on the fs. ) This issue looks like for me a race condition between the cpus. (2x Xeon HT) Am i right? :-) Thanks, Janos ----- Original Message ----- From: "Justin Piszcz" To: "Haar János" Cc: ; Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 3:32 PM Subject: Re: xfslogd-spinlock bug? I'm not sure what is causing this problem but I was curious is this on a 32bit or 64bit platform? Justin. On Tue, 12 Dec 2006, Haar János wrote: > Hello, list, > > I am the "big red button men" with the one big 14TB xfs, if somebody can > remember me. :-) > > Now i found something in the 2.6.16.18, and try the 2.6.18.4, and the > 2.6.19, but the bug still exists: > > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base BUG: spinlock bad magic on CPU#3, xfslogd/3/317 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base general protection fault: 0000 [1] > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base SMP > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base CPU 3 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base Modules linked in: > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base nbd > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base rd > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base netconsole > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base e1000 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base video > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base Pid: 317, comm: xfslogd/3 Not tainted 2.6.19 #1 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base RIP: 0010:[] > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base [] spin_bug+0x69/0xdf > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base RSP: 0018:ffff81011fb89bc0 EFLAGS: 00010002 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base RAX: 0000000000000033 RBX: 6b6b6b6b6b6b6b6b RCX: > 0000000000000000 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base RDX: ffffffff808137a0 RSI: 0000000000000082 RDI: > 0000000100000000 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base RBP: ffff81011fb89be0 R08: 0000000000026a70 R09: > 000000006b6b6b6b > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base R10: 0000000000000082 R11: ffff81000584d380 R12: > ffff8100db92ad80 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base R13: ffffffff80642dc6 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: > 0000000000000003 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base FS: 0000000000000000(0000) > GS:ffff81011fc76b90(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base CS: 0010 DS: 0018 ES: 0018 CR0: 000000008005003b > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base CR2: 00002ba007700000 CR3: 0000000108c05000 CR4: > 00000000000006e0 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base Process xfslogd/3 (pid: 317, threadinfo > ffff81011fb88000, task ffff81011fa7f830) > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base Stack: > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base ffff81011fb89be0 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base ffff8100db92ad80 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base 0000000000000000 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base 0000000000000000 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base ffff81011fb89c10 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base ffffffff803f3bdc > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base 0000000000000282 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base 0000000000000000 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base 0000000000000000 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base 0000000000000000 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base ffff81011fb89c30 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base ffffffff805e7f2b > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base Call Trace: > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base [] _raw_spin_lock+0x23/0xf1 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base [] _spin_lock_irqsave+0x11/0x18 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base [] __wake_up+0x22/0x50 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base [] xfs_buf_unpin+0x21/0x23 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base [] xfs_buf_item_unpin+0x2e/0xa6 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base [] > xfs_trans_chunk_committed+0xc3/0xf7 > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base [] xfs_trans_committed+0x49/0xde > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base [] > xlog_state_do_callback+0x185/0x33f > Dec 11 22:47:21 dy-base [] xlog_iodone+0x104/0x131 > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base [] xfs_buf_iodone_work+0x1a/0x3e > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base [] worker_thread+0x0/0x134 > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base [] run_workqueue+0xa8/0xf8 > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base [] xfs_buf_iodone_work+0x0/0x3e > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base [] worker_thread+0x0/0x134 > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base [] worker_thread+0xfb/0x134 > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base [] default_wake_function+0x0/0xf > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base [] worker_thread+0x0/0x134 > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base [] kthread+0xd8/0x10b > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base [] schedule_tail+0x45/0xa6 > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base [] child_rip+0xa/0x12 > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base [] worker_thread+0x0/0x134 > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base [] kthread+0x0/0x10b > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base [] child_rip+0x0/0x12 > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base Code: > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base 8b > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base 83 > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base 0c > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base 01 > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base 00 > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base 00 > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base 48 > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base 8d > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base 8b > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base 98 > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base 02 > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base 00 > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base 00 > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base 41 > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base 8b > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base 54 > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base 24 > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base 04 > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base 41 > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base 89 > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base RIP > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base [] spin_bug+0x69/0xdf > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base RSP > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal exception > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base > Dec 11 22:47:22 dy-base Rebooting in 5 seconds.. > > After this, sometimes the server reboots normally, but sometimes hangs, no > console, no sysreq, no nothing. > > This is a "simple" crash, no "too much" data lost, or else. > > Can somebody help me to tracking down the problem? > > Thanks, > Janos Haar > > > > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/