[Ocfs2-devel] kernel BUG in function ocfs2_truncate_file

Joseph Qi joseph.qi at huawei.com
Thu Apr 21 05:22:25 PDT 2016


Hi Gang,

On 2016/4/21 17:50, Gang He wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>>>>
>> Hi Gang,
>> May be. If so, it seems that it has relations with locks.
>> Can we know which data is newer?
> Hi Joseph, I do not get your question. 
> About this bug, the customer only have a panic message, no message/kernel dump is provided.
> 
Filesystem not corrupted doesn't mean the disk inode is right (the latest).
That means the in-memory inode may be right but happens that flush hasn't
been done successfully.
But as of now, we can't distinguish which the case is.

Thanks,
Joseph

> 
> Thanks
> Gang
> 
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Joseph
>>
>> On 2016/4/21 15:59, Gang He wrote:
>>> Hello Guys, 
>>>
>>> Sorry for delayed reply, the fsck log was reported from the customer.
>>> OCFS2 volumes to check are:
>>> /dev/dm-11                           83886080 44540260 39345820 54% /sapmnt
>>> /dev/dm-14                           62914560 15374960 47539600 25% /usr/sap
>>> /dev/dm-13                           89128960 19976272 69152688 23% 
>> /usr/sap/trans
>>> uii316:~ # fsck.ocfs2 /dev/dm-13
>>> fsck.ocfs2 1.8.2
>>> Checking OCFS2 filesystem in /dev/dm-13:
>>>  Label:        <NONE>
>>>  UUID:         E35AF95C8114494391E0FFDEFD07309B
>>>  Number of blocks: 22282240
>>>  Block size:     4096
>>>  Number of clusters: 22282240
>>>  Cluster size: 4096
>>>  Number of slots: 2
>>> /dev/dm-13 is clean. It will be checked after 20 additional mounts.
>>> uii316:~ # fsck.ocfs2 /dev/dm-14
>>> fsck.ocfs2 1.8.2
>>> Checking OCFS2 filesystem in /dev/dm-14: 
>>>  Label:        <NONE>
>>>  UUID:         43F2D9C8D70B47388527075F3C6C38BB
>>>  Number of blocks: 15728640
>>>  Block size:     4096
>>>  Number of clusters: 15728640
>>>  Cluster size: 4096
>>>  Number of slots: 2
>>> /dev/dm-14 is clean. It will be checked after 20 additional mounts.
>>> uii316:~ # fsck.ocfs2 /dev/dm-11
>>> fsck.ocfs2 1.8.2
>>> Checking OCFS2 filesystem in /dev/dm-11:
>>>  Label:        <NONE>
>>>  UUID:         0F1CBE6017934B5E8AD80149ED332659
>>>  Number of blocks: 20971520
>>>  Block size:     4096
>>>  Number of clusters: 20971520
>>>  Cluster size: 4096
>>>  Number of slots: 2
>>> /dev/dm-11 is clean. It will be checked after 20 additional mounts.
>>>
>>> >From the log, it looks the file systems were not corrupted, this should be a 
>> race-condition issue ?!
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Gang 
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>
>>>> On 03/31/2016 10:56 AM, Gang He wrote:
>>>>> Hello Joseph and Junxiao,
>>>>>
>>>>> Did you encounter this issue in the past? I doubt this is possible a race 
>>>> condition bug (rather than data inconsistency).
>>>> Never saw this. fsck report any corruption?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Junxiao.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>> Gang
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello Guys,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I got a bug, which reported a kernel BUG in function ocfs2_truncate_file,
>>>>>> Base on my initial analysis, this bug looks like a race condition problem.
>>>>>> Unfortunately, there was no kernel crash dump caught, just got some kernel 
>>>>>> log as below,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> kernel BUG at /usr/src/packages/BUILD/ocfs2-1.6/default/ocfs2/file.c:466!
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831230] Supported: Yes
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831234]
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831238] Pid: 7134, comm: saposcol Not tainted 
>>>>>> 3.0.101-0.47.67-default #1
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 HP ProLiant BL460c G1
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831247] RIP: 0010:[<ffffffffa0744b95>]
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [<ffffffffa0744b95>] ocfs2_truncate_file+0xa5/0x490 
>>>>>> [ocfs2]
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831312] RSP: 0018:ffff880f39d79b68  EFLAGS: 
>>>>>> 00010296
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831321] RAX: 000000000000008f RBX: 
>>>>>> ffff880f39c5e240 RCX: 00000000000039fd
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831326] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 
>>>>>> 0000000000000007 RDI: 0000000000000246
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831331] RBP: 1000000000000000 R08: 
>>>>>> ffffffff81da0ac0 R09: 0000000000000000
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831336] R10: 0000000000000003 R11: 
>>>>>> 00000000ffffffff R12: ffff880f3949bc78
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831342] R13: ffff880f39c5e888 R14: 
>>>>>> ffff880f3d481000 R15: 00000000000e43bc
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831347] FS:  00007f11cda9d720(0000) 
>>>>>> GS:ffff880fefd40000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831353] CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 
>>>>>> 0000000080050033
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831358] CR2: 00007f11cdad4000 CR3: 
>>>>>> 0000000f39d35000 CR4: 00000000000007e0
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831363] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 
>>>>>> 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831368] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 
>>>>>> 00000000ffff0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831374] Process saposcol (pid: 7134, 
>>>>>> threadinfo ffff880f39d78000, task ffff880f39c5e240)
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831379] Stack:
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831383]  000000000002433c
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 00000000000e43bc
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 00000000000eab40
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 ffff880f00000001
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831397]  ffff880f394956e0
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 ffff880f8e0d1000
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 ffff880f3949b800
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 0000000000000000
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831410]  ffff880f39454980
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 0000000000000001
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 000000000002433c
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 0000000000000008
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831423] Call Trace:
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831492]  [<ffffffffa074742e>] 
>>>>>> ocfs2_setattr+0x26e/0xa90 [ocfs2]
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831522]  [<ffffffff81178faf>] 
>>>>>> notify_change+0x19f/0x2f0
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831534]  [<ffffffff8115d517>] 
>>>>>> do_truncate+0x57/0x80
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831544]  [<ffffffff8116c053>] 
>>>>>> do_last+0x603/0x800
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831551]  [<ffffffff8116ceb9>] 
>>>>>> path_openat+0xd9/0x420
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831558]  [<ffffffff8116d33c>] 
>>>>>> do_filp_open+0x4c/0xc0
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831566]  [<ffffffff8115de5f>] 
>>>>>> do_sys_open+0x17f/0x250
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831575]  [<ffffffff8146e1f2>] 
>>>>>> system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831588]  [<00007f11ccb07080>] 0x7f11ccb0707f
>>>>>> Oct 21 13:02:19 uii316 [ 1766.831592] Code:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  The source code in question is as below,
>>>>>>  444 static int ocfs2_truncate_file(struct inode *inode,
>>>>>>  445                                struct buffer_head *di_bh,
>>>>>>  446                                u64 new_i_size)
>>>>>>  447 {
>>>>>>  448         int status = 0;
>>>>>>  449         struct ocfs2_dinode *fe = NULL;
>>>>>>  450         struct ocfs2_super *osb = OCFS2_SB(inode->i_sb);
>>>>>>  451
>>>>>>  452         /* We trust di_bh because it comes from ocfs2_inode_lock(), 
>>>>>> which
>>>>>>  453          * already validated it */
>>>>>>  454         fe = (struct ocfs2_dinode *) di_bh->b_data;
>>>>>>  455
>>>>>>  456         trace_ocfs2_truncate_file((unsigned long 
>>>>>> long)OCFS2_I(inode)->ip_blkno,
>>>>>>  457                                   (unsigned long 
>>>>>> long)le64_to_cpu(fe->i_size),
>>>>>>  458                                   (unsigned long long)new_i_size);
>>>>>>  459
>>>>>>  460         mlog_bug_on_msg(le64_to_cpu(fe->i_size) != i_size_read(inode),    
>>
>>>>
>>>>>>  <<= here
>>>>>>  461                         "Inode %llu, inode i_size = %lld != di "
>>>>>>  462                         "i_size = %llu, i_flags = 0x%x\n",
>>>>>>  463                         (unsigned long long)OCFS2_I(inode)->ip_blkno,
>>>>>>  464                         i_size_read(inode),
>>>>>>  465                         (unsigned long long)le64_to_cpu(fe->i_size),
>>>>>>  466                         le32_to_cpu(fe->i_flags));
>>>>>>  467
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If your encountered the similar issue in the past, please let me know, to 
>>>>>> see if there is any patch/discussion for this bug.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks a lot.
>>>>>> Gang
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Ocfs2-devel mailing list
>>>>>> Ocfs2-devel at oss.oracle.com 
>>>>>> https://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs2-devel 
>>>
>>> .
>>>
> 
> .
> 





More information about the Ocfs2-devel mailing list