Re: 2.6.18-rc3-git3 - XFS - BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 00000078

["Jesper Juhl" <jesper.juhl@gmail.com>]

On 11/08/06, Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/08/06, Nathan Scott <nathans@sgi.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 01:31:35PM +0200, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> > > On 08/08/06, Nathan Scott <nathans@sgi.com> wrote:
> > > ...
> > > Ok, I booted the server with 2.6.18-rc4 + your patch. Things went well
> > > for ~3 hours and then blew up - not in the same way though.
> > >
> > > The machine was under pretty heavy load recieving data via rsync when
> > > the following happened :
> > >
> > > Filesystem "dm-51": XFS internal error xfs_trans_cancel at line 1138
> > > of file fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c.  Caller 0xc0210e3f
> > >  [<c0103a3c>] show_trace_log_lvl+0x152/0x165
> > >  [<c0103a5e>] show_trace+0xf/0x13
> > >  [<c0103b59>] dump_stack+0x15/0x19
> > >  [<c0213474>] xfs_trans_cancel+0xcf/0xf8
> > >  [<c0210e3f>] xfs_rename+0x64d/0x936
> > >  [<c0226286>] xfs_vn_rename+0x48/0x9f
> > >  [<c016584e>] vfs_rename_other+0x99/0xcb
> > >  [<c0165a36>] vfs_rename+0x1b6/0x1eb
> > >  [<c0165bda>] do_rename+0x16f/0x193
> > >  [<c0165c45>] sys_renameat+0x47/0x73
> >
> > Thanks Jesper.  Hmm, lessee - this is a cancelled dirty rename
> > transaction ... could be ondisk dir2 corruption (any chance this
> > filesystem was affected by 2.6.17's endian bug?)
>
> No. The machine in question never ran any 2.6.17.* kernels. Its old
> kernel was 2.6.11.11 (UP), then I tried 2.6.18-rc3-git3 (SMP) as
> previously reported, then I tried 2.6.18-rc4 + your XFS patch.
>
Small correction;  The above is not 100% true. A single attempt was
made to boot the server with a 2.6.17.7 kernel but the e1000 driver
blew up with that kernel version and hung the box before any of these
filesystems were mounted (at least that's how it appeared since it
didn't *seem* to get any further than loading the e1000 driver - which
happens before these fs mounts). Then the machine was powercycled and
went back to 2.6.11.11
So I very much doubt that that single attempted 2.6.17.7 boot caused
any damage to this XFS filesystem.

-- 
Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com>
Don't top-post  http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please      http://www.expita.com/nomime.html