On Fri, Jul 06, 2012 at 08:33:51AM -0600, Sami Liedes wrote: > On Fri, Jul 06, 2012 at 12:42:50PM +0200, Jan Schmidt wrote: > > I've no good idea at the moment how to go on. It might help to get a feeling if > > it's shifting around at least a little bit or really constant in the timing of > > occurrence. So can you please apply the next patch on top of the other two and > > give it some more failure tries? The "checksum mismatch [1234]" line will be of > > most interest. I'm also curious what the additional debug variables will say in > > the extended version of the very first printk. You can leave out the stack > > traces if you like, they won't matter much anyway. > > Ok. Also turned on CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC and CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG_ON as > suggested by Chris Mason. > > With those and the latest patch, there's an oops already at boot. I > don't have netconsole yet at that point, but here's the important > parts (sure I can capture it fully if you need). > > By the way, something seems to be untabifying your patches. I don't > know if it's on my side or yours, but at least some other patches I > receive via linux-btrfs contain tabs. Doing a M-x tabify in emacs > mostly makes them apply cleanly for me. > > Sami > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > btrfs: disk space caching is enabled > BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 0000000000000150 > IP: [<ffffffffa0223568>] check_node+0x138/0x250 [btrfs] This isn't from any of the new debugging. Can you please try it on an unpatched kernel? -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
