Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: generic/456 regression on 5.7-rc1, 1k test case
To:     Eric Whitney <enwlinux@gmail.com>, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
References: <20200413201211.wbcotcr6rg523wzs@localhost.localdomain>
From:   Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Tue, 14 Apr 2020 08:22:12 +0530
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.7.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20200413201211.wbcotcr6rg523wzs@localhost.localdomain>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <20200414025213.752F411C04A@d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com>
Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hello Eric,

On 4/14/20 1:42 AM, Eric Whitney wrote:
> I'm seeing consistent failures for generic/456 while running kvm-xfstests' 1k
> test case on 5.7-rc1.  This is with an x86-64 test appliance root file system
> image dated 23 March 2020.
> 
> The test fails when e2fsck reports "inconsistent fs: inode 12, i_size is
> 147456, should be 163840".
> 
> Bisecting 5.7-rc1 identified the following patch as the cause:
> ext4: don't set dioread_nolock by default for blocksize < pagesize
> (626b035b816b).  Reverting the patch in 5.7-rc1 reliably eliminates the test
> failure.
> 

Since you could reliably reproduce it. Could you please try with this
patch and see if this fixes it for you?

https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linux-ext4/patch/20200331105016.8674-1-jack@suse.cz/

-ritesh