From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E9D3C11F68 for ; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 18:28:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6526C61DE3 for ; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 18:28:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235163AbhF2Sae (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Jun 2021 14:30:34 -0400 Received: from youngberry.canonical.com ([91.189.89.112]:46492 "EHLO youngberry.canonical.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234631AbhF2Sac (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Jun 2021 14:30:32 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-f71.google.com ([209.85.208.71]) by youngberry.canonical.com with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from ) id 1lyISp-000725-PT for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 18:28:03 +0000 Received: by mail-ed1-f71.google.com with SMTP id n13-20020a05640206cdb029039589a2a771so399290edy.5 for ; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 11:28:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:from:to:references:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=fYgcjWPuVQQkM+ld3lTDa/zt5ky7hqz4IgAOmjoJRPQ=; b=EwqpJ1DJWzcs/futriKc7S/2h/HUwmlFJhAT+xdHnIvV5m2Zcnse6ISP8wL2BFp4GO iahrTqDl+E6MMNnB/oKX0YX1NKuQXBOwmH0stPs4AEojyvbHOeDX0kX3mSx1L8j8S3JQ FFN5yjjPq4OFR+hjwcgZmwh7/F3TwrpPNI6O87fCwRIIyjARh5BYe0dHJWNsw4fRCBjl c/+EMajMIYK4oP9vv4Yu7RCHvG7oUA9oz1y6yPSLCI9REN6Pk86fl1JP1d3OvtpOJ0GC msuIQg0sL+myb3OnZAHMsOD7rS45RuHyLQ2ASFJ4jm8yZiAE3Y0QDiQpdMQ8ZiR7vmw1 3rxA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532pyXerBQE01B6/wdyhG2gb1AKjFeBHmA3lVGQqSh2Us3LnR70Y atpvSfTmHz749aFHBQvA4bKCKFxYNzjSfYlFP8yJtY18cQw7HmkO6mcuZDeUEn3M3uLSB3p+iKS TAaF1Kpm/4PGLS9GsWf7cDTc6V8w91cse0SALEHCaeg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:3e15:: with SMTP id k21mr5923601eji.423.1624991283445; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 11:28:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwGLqw1AwUxKpu6bhggUbVqYJuFIfNL6mC+UNE1sLGRBFc9Q0iOasyqzGrIJbdWtKTmTRhc+w== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:3e15:: with SMTP id k21mr5923594eji.423.1624991283312; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 11:28:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.115] (xdsl-188-155-177-222.adslplus.ch. [188.155.177.222]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n13sm8598198ejk.97.2021.06.29.11.28.02 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 29 Jun 2021 11:28:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [BUG] btrfs potential failure on 32 core LTP test (fallocate05) From: Krzysztof Kozlowski To: Josef Bacik , Chris Mason , David Sterba , linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , "kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com" , "ltp@lists.linux.it" , Qu Wenruo , Filipe Manana References: <124d7ead-6600-f369-7af1-a1bc27df135c@toxicpanda.com> <667133e5-44cb-8d95-c40a-12ac82f186f0@canonical.com> <0b6a502a-8db8-ef27-f48e-5001f351ef24@toxicpanda.com> <2576a472-1c99-889a-685c-a12bbfb08052@canonical.com> Message-ID: <9e2214b1-999d-90cf-a5c2-2dbb5a2eadd4@canonical.com> Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2021 20:28:02 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2576a472-1c99-889a-685c-a12bbfb08052@canonical.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 29/06/2021 20:06, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > Minor update - it's not only Azure's. AWS m5.8xlarge and m5.16xlarge (32 > and 64 cores) fail similarly. I'll try later also QEMU machines with > different amount of CPUs. > Test on QEMU machine with 31 CPUs passes. With 32 CPUs - failure as reported. dmesg is empty - no error around this. Maybe something with per-cpu variables? Best regards, Krzysztof