Excerpts from Chris Mason's message of 2011-06-13 09:12:06 -0400: > Excerpts from Li Zefan's message of 2011-06-13 03:13:13 -0400: > > Cc: Josef > > > > >>>>>>>> I encountered following panic using 'btrfs-unstable + for-linus' > > >>>>>>>> kernel. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> I ran "btrfs fi bal /test5" command, and mount option of /test5 > > >>>>>>>> is as follows: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> /dev/sdc3 on /test5 type btrfs (rw,space_cache,compress=lzo,inode_cache) > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> So, just a "btrfs fi bal" would lead to the bug? > > >>>>>> I think so. > > >> > > >> It should be specific to the inode caching code. The balancing code is > > >> finding the inode map cache extents, but it doesn't know how to relocate > > >> them. > > > > > > However, the panic has occurred even if inode_cahce is turned off. > > > Is this another problem? > > > > > > > I don't think free inode cache isthe cause of the bug here (even if inode_cache > > is turned on). > > > > What I have found out is: > > > > 1. git checkout a4abeea41adfa3c143c289045f4625dfaeba2212 > > > > So the top commit is the removal of trans_mutex and no delayed_inode patch > > or free inode cache patchset in the tree, and bug can be triggered. > > > > 2. git checkout 2a1eb4614d984d5cd4c928784e9afcf5c07f93be > > > > So the top commit is the one before trans_mutex removal, and no bug triggered. > > > > 3. test linus' tree > > > > bug triggered. > > > > 4. revert that suspicoius commit manually from linus' tree > > > > no bug. > > > > so either that commit is buggy or it reveals some bugs covered by the trans_mutex. > > Ok, what dataset are you balancing? > > What are you doing concurrently with the balance? > > I haven't been able to trigger this here. There we go. It took about two hours but I hit this with the balancing exerciser that was posted. -chris -- 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
