Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 19 Dec 2006 09:36:37 +1100 | From | David Chinner <> | Subject | Re: xfslogd-spinlock bug? |
| |
On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 09:17:50AM +0100, Haar János wrote: > From: "David Chinner" <dgc@sgi.com> > > > The NBD serves through eth1, and it is on the CPU3, but the ide0 is on > the > > > CPU0. > > > > I'd say your NBD based XFS filesystem is having trouble. > > > > > > Are you using XFS on a NBD? > > > > > > Yes, on the 3. source. > > > > Ok, I've never heard of a problem like this before and you are doing > > something that very few ppl are doing (i.e. XFS on NBD). I'd start > > Hence I'd start by suspecting a bug in the NBD driver. > > Ok, if you have right, this also can be in context with the following issue: > > http://download.netcenter.hu/bughunt/20061217/messages.txt (10KB)
Which appears to be a crash in wake_up_process() when doing memory reclaim (waking the xfsbufd).
> > > > > Dec 16 12:08:36 dy-base RSP: 0018:ffff81011fdedbc0 EFLAGS: 00010002 > > > > > Dec 16 12:08:36 dy-base RAX: 0000000000000033 RBX: 6b6b6b6b6b6b6b6b > RCX: > > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > > Anyone recognise that pattern?
Ok, I've found this pattern:
#define POISON_FREE 0x6b
Can you confirm that you are running with CONFIG_DEBUG_SLAB=y?
If so, we have a use after free occurring here and it would also explain why no-one has reported it before.
FWIW, can you turn on CONFIG_XFS_DEBUG=y and see if that triggers a different bug check prior to the above dump?
Cheers,
Dave. -- Dave Chinner Principal Engineer SGI Australian Software Group - 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/
| |