We are hitting the following warning in the field pretty frequently on
the latest 3.10 stable kernel:
[11708.763067] WARNING: at fs/ext4/inode.c:363
ext4_da_update_reserve_space+0x261/0x280 [ext4]()
The issue was resolved via "ext4: fix warning in
ext4_da_update_reserve_space()" (7d7345322d60ed), but the fix was not
submitted as a stable update for 3.10. I was wondering if there's a
reason why this was not done, or if it was just overlooked?
The patch appears to have a dependency on "quota: provide interface for
readding allocated space into reserved space" (1c8924eb106c1ac), so I
think both would need to be submitted if you feel it's possible.
Thanks
Josh
On Wed 07-01-15 12:12:59, Josh Hunt wrote:
> We are hitting the following warning in the field pretty frequently
> on the latest 3.10 stable kernel:
> [11708.763067] WARNING: at fs/ext4/inode.c:363
> ext4_da_update_reserve_space+0x261/0x280 [ext4]()
>
> The issue was resolved via "ext4: fix warning in
> ext4_da_update_reserve_space()" (7d7345322d60ed), but the fix was
> not submitted as a stable update for 3.10. I was wondering if
> there's a reason why this was not done, or if it was just
> overlooked?
>
> The patch appears to have a dependency on "quota: provide interface
> for readding allocated space into reserved space" (1c8924eb106c1ac),
> so I think both would need to be submitted if you feel it's
> possible.
Since the problem is relatively harmless, I think we didn't bother
porting it to 3.10. Feel free to port those two patches to 3.10 and submit
them to [email protected].
Honza
--
Jan Kara <[email protected]>
SUSE Labs, CR
On 01/07/2015 01:21 PM, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Wed 07-01-15 12:12:59, Josh Hunt wrote:
>> We are hitting the following warning in the field pretty frequently
>> on the latest 3.10 stable kernel:
>> [11708.763067] WARNING: at fs/ext4/inode.c:363
>> ext4_da_update_reserve_space+0x261/0x280 [ext4]()
>>
>> The issue was resolved via "ext4: fix warning in
>> ext4_da_update_reserve_space()" (7d7345322d60ed), but the fix was
>> not submitted as a stable update for 3.10. I was wondering if
>> there's a reason why this was not done, or if it was just
>> overlooked?
>>
>> The patch appears to have a dependency on "quota: provide interface
>> for readding allocated space into reserved space" (1c8924eb106c1ac),
>> so I think both would need to be submitted if you feel it's
>> possible.
> Since the problem is relatively harmless, I think we didn't bother
> porting it to 3.10. Feel free to port those two patches to 3.10 and submit
> them to [email protected].
Thanks for the reply Jan.
I've ported them locally to 3.10 and they seem to apply cleanly as-is. I
can submit the request to stable as long as you believe there's no harm
in doing so, or any other dependency which may be required. My testing
of a patched 3.10 with the two above patches shows the warning no longer
triggers as you report in your commit log.
Thanks
Josh
On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 12:12:59PM -0600, Josh Hunt wrote:
> We are hitting the following warning in the field pretty frequently on the
> latest 3.10 stable kernel:
> [11708.763067] WARNING: at fs/ext4/inode.c:363
> ext4_da_update_reserve_space+0x261/0x280 [ext4]()
>
> The issue was resolved via "ext4: fix warning in
> ext4_da_update_reserve_space()" (7d7345322d60ed), but the fix was not
> submitted as a stable update for 3.10. I was wondering if there's a reason
> why this was not done, or if it was just overlooked?
>
> The patch appears to have a dependency on "quota: provide interface for
> readding allocated space into reserved space" (1c8924eb106c1ac), so I think
> both would need to be submitted if you feel it's possible.
Have you tried backporting these two commits, and does it fix the
problem for you?
I think it was mostly an oversight, although it might have also been
my thinking that it was only a warning, so it wasn't that critical to
backport. To be honest, I can't really recall exactly what happened
with that patch at this point.
If it does seen to work for you, I'm happy to suggest to the 3.10
stable kernel maintainers to have it be backported.
- Ted
On 01/07/2015 01:53 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 12:12:59PM -0600, Josh Hunt wrote:
>> We are hitting the following warning in the field pretty frequently on the
>> latest 3.10 stable kernel:
>> [11708.763067] WARNING: at fs/ext4/inode.c:363
>> ext4_da_update_reserve_space+0x261/0x280 [ext4]()
>>
>> The issue was resolved via "ext4: fix warning in
>> ext4_da_update_reserve_space()" (7d7345322d60ed), but the fix was not
>> submitted as a stable update for 3.10. I was wondering if there's a reason
>> why this was not done, or if it was just overlooked?
>>
>> The patch appears to have a dependency on "quota: provide interface for
>> readding allocated space into reserved space" (1c8924eb106c1ac), so I think
>> both would need to be submitted if you feel it's possible.
>
> Have you tried backporting these two commits, and does it fix the
> problem for you?
Yeah I backported both. They both apply cleanly to 3.10 iirc. I will
report back if they do not.
Yes, moving both of these to 3.10 fixes the problem for me.
>
> I think it was mostly an oversight, although it might have also been
> my thinking that it was only a warning, so it wasn't that critical to
> backport. To be honest, I can't really recall exactly what happened
> with that patch at this point.
>
> If it does seen to work for you, I'm happy to suggest to the 3.10
> stable kernel maintainers to have it be backported.
That would be great, thanks!
Josh
On Wed 07-01-15 13:49:46, Josh Hunt wrote:
> On 01/07/2015 01:21 PM, Jan Kara wrote:
> >On Wed 07-01-15 12:12:59, Josh Hunt wrote:
> >>We are hitting the following warning in the field pretty frequently
> >>on the latest 3.10 stable kernel:
> >>[11708.763067] WARNING: at fs/ext4/inode.c:363
> >>ext4_da_update_reserve_space+0x261/0x280 [ext4]()
> >>
> >>The issue was resolved via "ext4: fix warning in
> >>ext4_da_update_reserve_space()" (7d7345322d60ed), but the fix was
> >>not submitted as a stable update for 3.10. I was wondering if
> >>there's a reason why this was not done, or if it was just
> >>overlooked?
> >>
> >>The patch appears to have a dependency on "quota: provide interface
> >>for readding allocated space into reserved space" (1c8924eb106c1ac),
> >>so I think both would need to be submitted if you feel it's
> >>possible.
> > Since the problem is relatively harmless, I think we didn't bother
> >porting it to 3.10. Feel free to port those two patches to 3.10 and submit
> >them to [email protected].
>
> Thanks for the reply Jan.
>
> I've ported them locally to 3.10 and they seem to apply cleanly
> as-is. I can submit the request to stable as long as you believe
> there's no harm in doing so, or any other dependency which may be
> required. My testing of a patched 3.10 with the two above patches
> shows the warning no longer triggers as you report in your commit
> log.
I'm not aware of any reason why these patches shouldn't be in 3.10 stable
so just go ahead. Thanks!
Honza
--
Jan Kara <[email protected]>
SUSE Labs, CR
On 01/08/2015 01:48 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Wed 07-01-15 13:49:46, Josh Hunt wrote:
>> On 01/07/2015 01:21 PM, Jan Kara wrote:
>>> On Wed 07-01-15 12:12:59, Josh Hunt wrote:
>>>> We are hitting the following warning in the field pretty frequently
>>>> on the latest 3.10 stable kernel:
>>>> [11708.763067] WARNING: at fs/ext4/inode.c:363
>>>> ext4_da_update_reserve_space+0x261/0x280 [ext4]()
>>>>
>>>> The issue was resolved via "ext4: fix warning in
>>>> ext4_da_update_reserve_space()" (7d7345322d60ed), but the fix was
>>>> not submitted as a stable update for 3.10. I was wondering if
>>>> there's a reason why this was not done, or if it was just
>>>> overlooked?
>>>>
>>>> The patch appears to have a dependency on "quota: provide interface
>>>> for readding allocated space into reserved space" (1c8924eb106c1ac),
>>>> so I think both would need to be submitted if you feel it's
>>>> possible.
>>> Since the problem is relatively harmless, I think we didn't bother
>>> porting it to 3.10. Feel free to port those two patches to 3.10 and submit
>>> them to [email protected].
>>
>> Thanks for the reply Jan.
>>
>> I've ported them locally to 3.10 and they seem to apply cleanly
>> as-is. I can submit the request to stable as long as you believe
>> there's no harm in doing so, or any other dependency which may be
>> required. My testing of a patched 3.10 with the two above patches
>> shows the warning no longer triggers as you report in your commit
>> log.
> I'm not aware of any reason why these patches shouldn't be in 3.10 stable
> so just go ahead. Thanks!
It looks like there is a small merge conflict in one of the patches. I
will respin it and submit to stable cc'ing you guys.
Thanks
Josh