[Ocfs2-users] ocfs2-users@oss.oracle.com

[Alexei_Roudnev]

Which kernel do you use? If it is native SP3 kernel, then better upgrade to
the last one (# 276) or at least to #255.

Native SP3 had old ocfs2 with numerous bugs.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kai Nielsen" <kn at moonage.net>
To: <ocfs2-users at oss.oracle.com>
Sent: Sunday, August 20, 2006 11:25 PM
Subject: [Ocfs2-users] ocfs2-users at oss.oracle.com


> Hi!
>
> Is the the place to report/discuss ocfs2 related kernel bugs?
>
> We just had some file system corruption on a two node SLES9SP3 cluster
> with shared ocfs2 filesystem.
>
> /var/log/messages told me:
>
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel: (8504,3):ocfs2_meta_lock_update:1423
ERROR: bug expression: le64_to_cpu(fe->i_dtime) || !(fe->i_flags &
cpu_to_le32(OCFS2_VALID_FL))
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel: (8504,3):ocfs2_meta_lock_update:1423
ERROR: Stale dinode 17079 dtime: 1155822895 flags: 0x0
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel: ------------[ cut here ]------------
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel: kernel BUG at fs/ocfs2/dlmglue.c:1423!
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel: invalid operand: 0000 [#1]
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel: SMP
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel: CPU:    3
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel: EIP:    0060:[<f9fe72ff>]    Tainted:
PF  U
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel: EFLAGS: 00010246   (2.6.5-7.244-smp
SLES9_SP3_BRANCH-200512121832250000)
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel: EIP is at
ocfs2_meta_lock_full+0x46f/0x10d0 [ocfs2]
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel: eax: 0000005f   ebx: f5573990   ecx:
c03aab74   edx: 0001a8d3
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel: esi: d68be000   edi: 00000000   ebp:
fa017f08   esp: f3ef1dc4
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel: ds: 007b   es: 007b   ss: 0068
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel: Process nfsd (pid: 8504,
threadinfo=f3ef0000 task=f5573990)
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel: Stack: fa01c23c 00002138 00000003
fa017f08 0000058f 000042b7 00000000 44e4752f
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel:        00000000 00000000 f4abb35c
d68be000 d1892788 f569c06c f569c06c d1892788
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel:        00000001 00000000 00000000
d1892978 dc1efc10 00000000 d7bf2200 f4abb200
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel: Call Trace:
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel:  [<c0339acc>]
svc_sock_enqueue+0x13c/0x2a0
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel:  [<c033b068>]
svc_tcp_recvfrom+0x428/0x870
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel:  [<f9feff19>]
ocfs2_inode_revalidate+0x139/0x2f0 [ocfs2]
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel:  [<f9fe87fc>]
ocfs2_decode_fh+0xbc/0x2a0 [ocfs2]
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel:  [<f98e30b0>] nfsd_acceptable+0x0/0xf7
[nfsd]
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel:  [<f9feafa9>] ocfs2_getattr+0x49/0x1e0
[ocfs2]
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel:  [<c01395cd>]
set_current_groups+0x19d/0x1d0
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel:  [<f9feaf60>] ocfs2_getattr+0x0/0x1e0
[ocfs2]
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel:  [<c017ec14>] vfs_getattr_it+0x54/0x120
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel:  [<c017eced>] vfs_getattr+0xd/0x10
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel:  [<f98ee02b>]
nfs3svc_encode_attrstat+0x6b/0x250 [nfsd]
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel:  [<f98eb943>]
nfsd3_proc_getattr+0x73/0xb0 [nfsd]
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel:  [<f98edfc0>]
nfs3svc_encode_attrstat+0x0/0x250 [nfsd]
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel:  [<f98e018d>] nfsd_dispatch+0x16d/0x1e0
[nfsd]
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel:  [<c033c2ad>]
svc_authenticate+0x4d/0x8d
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel:  [<c0338a22>] svc_process+0x272/0x670
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel:  [<c010a1da>]
apic_timer_interrupt+0x1a/0x20
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel:  [<f98e0624>] nfsd+0x1c4/0x369 [nfsd]
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel:  [<f98e0460>] nfsd+0x0/0x369 [nfsd]
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel:  [<c0107005>]
kernel_thread_helper+0x5/0x10
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel:
> Aug 17 15:56:17 tux100p012 kernel: Code: 0f 0b 8f 05 29 7a 01 fa 8b 54 24
2c 8b 44 24 4c e8 bc 82 00
>
> Does this say anything about what happened? We don't want to run into
> this probloem again, of course.
>
> Regards,
>
>           Kai.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ocfs2-users mailing list
> Ocfs2-users at oss.oracle.com
> http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs2-users
>