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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0819EC43334 for ; Thu, 14 Jul 2022 02:34:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230395AbiGNCeB (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Jul 2022 22:34:01 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42232 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229468AbiGNCd5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Jul 2022 22:33:57 -0400 Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E67D13F6D; Wed, 13 Jul 2022 19:33:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1657766036; x=1689302036; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=I5hjFOSDtYbEsmlYEojMoJNQjvq4evioSAOLKrCe7hw=; b=i2GdmA7lH/bIAOxczeu8QxULCqj8dndMeV6Acw2ltGhjcEPFy/I2Awit 7HH5iuoFDMxIvhTZ++8o6ByITszcV/9y8p7IuQtPuL+EHFwVeNeyCzUcf QRIQa0lC57Q5kYf9GN0D81zSdRkx4lJzZg9T+vtIdHZReSfgCvI8Kx/Jf 3JaL4QKp4BW3USNj6m8aV3B2q4A9HYFz1BBUSjI1OGhiiF9lbIlaemZW/ PXX8fUKMF2Vf05HBUZ+jVkTG2oZ5vDKlfbWYzVvzm0h9CeZ2u4MHKfWjr GVE9cJCPSi1YcqzTMIa8hqrIuMRYD1aT7qjv8P+F76hhKKkndd1GMnyeh g==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6400,9594,10407"; a="284151378" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.92,269,1650956400"; d="scan'208";a="284151378" Received: from fmsmga008.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.58]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 13 Jul 2022 19:33:56 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.92,269,1650956400"; d="scan'208";a="653670813" Received: from xsang-optiplex-9020.sh.intel.com (HELO xsang-OptiPlex-9020) ([10.239.159.143]) by fmsmga008-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 13 Jul 2022 19:33:54 -0700 Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2022 10:33:46 +0800 From: Oliver Sang To: Dave Chinner Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" , Dave Chinner , LKML , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, lkp@lists.01.org, lkp@intel.com Subject: Re: [xfs] 47a6df7cd3: Assertion_failed Message-ID: References: <20220712214745.GL3861211@dread.disaster.area> <20220714012421.GO3861211@dread.disaster.area> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220714012421.GO3861211@dread.disaster.area> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, Dave, On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 11:24:21AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Wed, Jul 13, 2022 at 02:25:25PM +0800, Oliver Sang wrote: > > hi Dave, > > > > On Wed, Jul 13, 2022 at 07:47:45AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > > > > > > If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag > > > > Reported-by: kernel test robot > > > > > > > > > > > > [ 94.271323][ T9089] XFS (sda5): Mounting V5 Filesystem > > > > [ 94.369992][ T9089] XFS (sda5): Ending clean mount > > > > [ 94.376046][ T9089] xfs filesystem being mounted at /fs/scratch supports timestamps until 2038 (0x7fffffff) > > > > [ 112.154792][ T311] xfs/076 IPMI BMC is not supported on this machine, skip bmc-watchdog setup! > > > > [ 112.154805][ T311] > > > > [ 161.426026][T29384] XFS: Assertion failed: xfs_is_shutdown(mp) || list_empty(&tp->t_dfops), file: fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c, line: 951 > > > > [ 161.437713][T29384] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > > > > [ 161.443155][T29384] kernel BUG at fs/xfs/xfs_message.c:110! > > > > [ 161.448854][T29384] invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI > > > > [ 161.454536][T29384] CPU: 1 PID: 29384 Comm: touch Not tainted 5.16.0-rc5-00001-g47a6df7cd317 #1 > > > > > > 5.16-rc5? Seems like a really old kernel to be testing.... > > > > > > Does this reproduce on a current 5.19-rc6 kernel? > > > > yes, it's still reproducible. however, it's actually random on both 47a6df7cd3 > > and 5.19-rc6, as below. > > it's clean on 40 runs of v5.16-rc5, > > on 47a6df7cd3, it's reproduced 9 times out of 40 runs, > > Of course, 47a6df7cd3 introduced the ASSERT that is firing. You'll > never see the failure on kernels before this, even if the issue is > occurring. It also points out this isn't a new issue, it's been > around since before we added detection of it. understood. for such kind of ASSERT (or WARNING, etc.) we normally reported on the commit we could bisected out (like this 47a6df7cd3 :) ) just for information since it could help people in the area to notice there is maybe something wrong around. it's kind of hard for us to backport the commit to old commits then each step of bisection to figure out when the issue really starts to happen, (but hope we can do this one day :) ) > > > on v5.19-rc6, it's reprodced 7 times out of 20 runs. > > Hmmm. I've just run 50 iterations here on my 5.19-rc6 based VMs > and I haven't seen a single failure. So it's not failing regularly > here which means it is influenced by environmental factors. > > How big are the disks you are testing with? for this xfstests/4HDD-xfs-xfs-group-07 test, we used 4 HDD, each with the size of 300G. but I noticed the ASSERT always happen after xfs/076, which seems only use two of them (below sda2, sda5) [ 92.590707][ T1440] run fstests xfs/076 at 2022-07-13 01:44:34 [ 93.231849][ T8987] XFS (sda2): Mounting V5 Filesystem [ 93.267497][ T8987] XFS (sda2): Ending clean mount [ 93.274183][ T8987] xfs filesystem being mounted at /fs/sda2 supports timestamps until 2038 (0x7fffffff) [ 95.221223][ T9080] XFS (sda5): Mounting V5 Filesystem [ 95.384072][ T9080] XFS (sda5): Ending clean mount [ 95.409130][ T9080] xfs filesystem being mounted at /fs/scratch supports timestamps until 2038 (0x7fffffff) [ 95.425082][ T9089] XFS (sda5): Unmounting Filesystem [ 95.752530][ T9111] XFS (sda5): Mounting V5 Filesystem [ 95.827062][ T9111] XFS (sda5): Ending clean mount [ 95.833635][ T9111] xfs filesystem being mounted at /fs/scratch supports timestamps until 2038 (0x7fffffff) [ 113.521272][ T306] xfs/076 IPMI BMC is not supported on this machine, skip bmc-watchdog setup! [ 113.521286][ T306] [ 162.318194][T29029] XFS: Assertion failed: xfs_is_shutdown(mp) || list_empty(&tp->t_dfops), file: fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c, line: 993 [ 162.330026][T29029] ------------[ cut here ]------------ ... root@lkp-ivb-d04 ~# lsblk NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT sda 8:0 0 1.8T 0 disk |-sda1 8:1 0 400G 0 part |-sda2 8:2 0 300G 0 part <---------- |-sda3 8:3 0 300G 0 part |-sda4 8:4 0 300G 0 part `-sda5 8:5 0 300G 0 part <---------- sdb 8:16 0 223.6G 0 disk `-sdb1 8:17 0 223.6G 0 part root@lkp-ivb-d04 ~# lsblk -f NAME FSTYPE FSVER LABEL UUID FSAVAIL FSUSE% MOUNTPOINT sda |-sda1 btrfs 1c70720c-3bc1-4cda-b623-7eeebdf0eace |-sda2 xfs f03ce528-b832-4844-8a14-65977d07ecf2 <-------- |-sda3 |-sda4 `-sda5 xfs e95d9e0e-46a3-4fe6-8b4c-19bc1e2b2dfe <-------- sdb `-sdb1 ocfs2 0.90 single_run a218e812-7152-4a71-a666-2379ff94dd40 > > Cheers, > > Dave. > -- > Dave Chinner > david@fromorbit.com