On 04/02/2011 06:41 PM, Sergei Trofimovich wrote: > On Sat, 02 Apr 2011 17:37:58 +0800 > liubo <liubo2009@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 04/02/2011 05:19 PM, Sergei Trofimovich wrote: >>> The partition is a physical ~5GB --mixed lzo compressed partition. >>> >>> The kernel 2.6.39-rc1 + reverted commit c59021f846881a957ac5afe456d0f59d6a517b61. >>> (see http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-btrfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg09083.html) >>> >> Hi, Sergei, >> >> I'm digging this... >> >> Can u show me steps to reproduce this? > > I use the filesystem as a storage of large CVS tree and > as temp storage for large compilations, so I can roughly > describe what I did and when it failed. > > I've formatter btrfs 5G partition as --mixed and mounter it with lzo compression > on the kernel of version 'v2.6.38-4148-g054cfaa', then checked out there > large CVS tree (~170K files, weights 177MB), copied there linux source (not built) > and copied my '/var/'. I ran compiles there and started to get -ENOSPC > OOpses when 'df -h' reported 3.5G free. > > As Linus pulled josef's changes, so I've updated to v2.6.38-6555-ga44f99c > and kernel started to OOps right after mount (added assert started to trigger earlier). > I've reported it to this ML (link above). josef and sensille helped me to debug what's > going wrong [both CCed]. sensille pointed to the commit, which is guilty to miscomputing > available space. As I understood they know what exactly screwed up. > Great thanks for these details. I did not consider the "mix" case when making the guilty patch, sorry. Frankly, I'm still trying to reproduce your first bug, and on my box "mix + lzo" does not cause bug... Seems that you are using opensuse's kernel. > The second case (this one): > I still use the same filesystem (didn't reformat, so it might carry some corruption > after debugging patches). > I've reverted your change c59021f846881a957ac5afe456d0f59d6a517b61 > and made sure it stops OOpsing for me, then updated to 2.6.39-rc1 > and reverted only this commit. Filesystem became usable until I've decided > to run large compile on it (clang debug source). > > I think at the time of OOps the following things did happen simultaneously: > > 1. one process was splitting debug symbols of some binary: > - opened original binary for read > - write to new file (stripped binary) > - write debug symbols to separate file > > 2. another process logged that action to log file > > 3. the filesystem filled-up and OOpsed. At the time of OOps > 'df -h' showed 200M free. > > I'm trying to reproduce this second case ATM (build takes > more, that an hour). > All right, thanks for the work. thanks, liubo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
