Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758009Ab1FJSeg (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Jun 2011 14:34:36 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:12258 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757903Ab1FJSee (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Jun 2011 14:34:34 -0400 Message-ID: <4DF263AD.3070901@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 14:34:21 -0400 From: Josef Bacik User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110428 Fedora/3.1.10-1.fc15 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sage Weil CC: Chris Mason , Jim Schutt , dave , miaox , linux-kernel , linux-btrfs , ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 3.0-rcX BUG at fs/btrfs/ioctl.c:432 - bisected References: <4DF140AB.4030805@sandia.gov> <20110609234553.GN12709@twin.jikos.cz> <4DF24F0E.4040306@sandia.gov> <1307726732-sup-3404@shiny> <4DF2627F.4030600@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3439 Lines: 88 On 06/10/2011 02:35 PM, Sage Weil wrote: > On Fri, 10 Jun 2011, Josef Bacik wrote: >> On 06/10/2011 02:14 PM, Sage Weil wrote: >>> On Fri, 10 Jun 2011, Sage Weil wrote: >>>> On Fri, 10 Jun 2011, Chris Mason wrote: >>>>> Excerpts from Jim Schutt's message of 2011-06-10 13:06:22 -0400: >>>>> >>>>> [ two different btrfs crashes ] >>>>> >>>>> I think your two crashes in btrfs were from the uninit variables and >>>>> those should be fixed in rc2. >>>>> >>>>>> When I did my bisection, my criteria for success/failure was >>>>>> "did mkcephfs succeed?". When I apply this criteria to a recent >>>>>> linus kernel (e.g. 06e86849cf4019), which includes the fix you >>>>>> mentioned (aa0467d8d2a00e), I get still a different failure mode, >>>>>> which doesn't actually reference btrfs: >>>>>> >>>>>> [ 276.364178] BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 000000000000000a >>>>>> [ 276.365127] IP: [] journal_start+0x3e/0x9c [jbd] >>>>> >>>>> Looking at the resulting code in the oops, we're here in journal_start: >>>>> >>>>> if (handle) { >>>>> J_ASSERT(handle->h_transaction->t_journal == journal); >>>>> >>>>> handle comes from current->journal_info, and we're doing a deref on >>>>> handle->h_transaction, which is probably 0xa. >>>>> >>>>> So, we're leaving crud in current->journal_info and ext3 is finding it. >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps its from ceph starting a transaction but leaving it running? >>>>> The bug came with Josef's transaction performance fixes, but it is >>>>> probably a mixture of his code with the ioctls ceph is using. >>>> >>>> Ah, yeah, that's the problem. We saw a similar problem a while back with >>>> the start/stop transaction ioctls. In this case, create_snapshot is doing >>>> >>>> trans = btrfs_start_transaction(root->fs_info->extent_root, 5); >>>> if (IS_ERR(trans)) { >>>> ret = PTR_ERR(trans); >>>> goto fail; >>>> } >>>> >>>> which sets current->journal_info. Then >>>> >>>> ret = btrfs_snap_reserve_metadata(trans, pending_snapshot); >>>> BUG_ON(ret); >>>> >>>> list_add(&pending_snapshot->list, >>>> &trans->transaction->pending_snapshots); >>>> if (async_transid) { >>>> *async_transid = trans->transid; >>>> ret = btrfs_commit_transaction_async(trans, >>>> root->fs_info->extent_root, 1); >>>> } else { >>>> ret = btrfs_commit_transaction(trans, >>>> root->fs_info->extent_root); >>>> } >>>> >>>> but the async snap creation ioctl takes the async path, which runs >>>> btrfs_commit_transaction in a worker thread. >>>> >>>> I'm not sure what the right thing to do is here is... can whatever is in >>>> journal_info be attached to trans instead in >>>> btrfs_commit_transaction_async()? >>> >>> It looks like it's not used for anything in btrfs, actually; it's just set >>> and cleared. What's the point of that? >>> >> >> It is used now, check the beginning of start_transaction(). Thanks, > > Oh I see, okay. > > So clearing it in btrfs_commit_transaction_async should be fine then, > right? When btrfs_commit_transaction runs in the other thread it won't > care that current->journal_info is NULL. > Oh yeah your patch is good :), Josef -- 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/