From: Frank van Maarseveen Subject: Re: 2.6.24.3 kernel BUG at fs/nfs/pagelist.c:82 Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 13:57:16 +0100 Message-ID: <20080320125716.GA20071@janus> References: <20080319094942.GA7627@janus> <1206017233.8465.7.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org To: Trond Myklebust Return-path: Received: from frankvm.xs4all.nl ([80.126.170.174]:45163 "EHLO janus.localdomain" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754666AbYCTM5T (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Mar 2008 08:57:19 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1206017233.8465.7.camel-rJ7iovZKK19ZJLDQqaL3InhyD016LWXt@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 08:47:13AM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote: > > On Wed, 2008-03-19 at 10:49 +0100, Frank van Maarseveen wrote: > > FYI, > > > > 2.6.24.3 wrote: > > > kernel BUG at fs/nfs/pagelist.c:82! > > > > BUG_ON(PagePrivate(page)); > > > > > invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP > > > Modules linked in: vmnetfilter vmnet(P) vmmon(P) vmthrottle > > > > In addition, there are some NFS patches for handling >16 groups and > > selectively disabling attribute caching so its not a clean kernel. > > > > > > > > Pid: 4575, comm: tail Tainted: P (2.6.24.3-x177 #1) ^^^^ > > > EIP: 0060:[] EFLAGS: 00010202 CPU: 1 > > > EIP is at nfs_create_request+0xf4/0x100 > > > EAX: 80000821 EBX: e31a5300 ECX: 00000000 EDX: c1f0712c > > > ESI: c1f0712c EDI: e31a5338 EBP: e56dfd90 ESP: e56dfd74 > > > DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 00d8 GS: 0033 SS: 0068 > > > Process tail (pid: 4575, ti=e56de000 task=d4b65500 task.ti=e56de000) > > > Stack: 00000000 f669ad20 cac3c168 e7330cb0 00000000 00000000 cac3c168 e56dfdc8 > > > c01fded5 00000000 000000a4 039cffff 000000a4 c1f0712c cac3c168 e7330cb0 > > > e56dfdb4 e56dfdb4 ffffff8c c1f0712c e7330cb0 e56dfdf0 c01fe8ce e56dfddc > > > Call Trace: > > > [] show_trace_log_lvl+0x1a/0x30 > > > [] show_stack_log_lvl+0x9a/0xc0 > > > [] show_registers+0xc8/0x1d0 > > > [] die+0x10c/0x230 > > > [] do_trap+0x91/0xd0 > > > [] do_invalid_op+0x89/0xa0 > > > [] error_code+0x72/0x80 > > > [] nfs_readpage_async+0xb5/0x1b0 > > > [] nfs_readpage+0xae/0x120 > > > [] do_generic_mapping_read+0xe8/0x440 > > > [] generic_file_aio_read+0x160/0x190 > > > [] nfs_file_read+0x97/0xe0 > > > [] do_sync_read+0xc7/0x120 > > > [] vfs_read+0x84/0x130 > > > [] sys_read+0x3d/0x70 > > > [] syscall_call+0x7/0xb > > > ======================= > > > Code: 02 75 0a e8 4f dc 3b 00 e9 4a ff ff ff 83 c4 10 b8 00 fe ff ff 5b 5e 5f 5d c3 8b 56 0c e9 7a ff ff ff 0f 0b eb fe 90 0f 0b eb fe <0f> 0b eb fe 90 8d b4 26 00 00 00 00 55 89 e5 53 83 ec 04 89 c3 > > > EIP: [] nfs_create_request+0xf4/0x100 SS:ESP 0068:e56dfd74 > > > ---[ end trace 0ef921372ea6410b ]--- > > > > The machine is a quad Xeon with 4GB ram with CONFIG_HIGHMEM64G=y > > Would that be on a file that was open for read and write, or is it > possible that some other process was writing to the same file? If so, > then it might be a bug in nfs_wb_page(). Yes, I'm quite sure it was a "tail -f" on a logfile which gets continuously appended to by another process.. So, one process reads it while another one writes to it through different descriptors/struct file. -- Frank