Re: BUG: warning at fs/ext3/inode.c:1016/ext3_getblk()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Dave Kleikamp wrote:
On Tue, 2006-09-05 at 11:09 -0700, Badari Pulavarty wrote:
On Tue, 2006-09-05 at 13:10 -0400, Will Simoneau wrote:
Has anyone seen this before? These three traces occured at different times
today when three new user accounts (and associated quotas) were created. This
machine is an NFS server which uses quotas on an ext3 fs (dir_index is on).
Kernel is 2.6.17.11 on an x86 smp w/64G highmem; 4G ram is installed. The
affected filesystem is on a software raid1 of two hardware raid0 volumes from a
megaraid card.

BUG: warning at fs/ext3/inode.c:1016/ext3_getblk()
 <c01c5140> ext3_getblk+0x98/0x2a6  <c03b2806> md_wakeup_thread+0x26/0x2a
 <c01c536d> ext3_bread+0x1f/0x88  <c01cedf9> ext3_quota_read+0x136/0x1ae
 <c018b683> v1_read_dqblk+0x61/0xac  <c0188f32> dquot_acquire+0xf6/0x107
 <c01ceaba> ext3_acquire_dquot+0x46/0x68  <c01897d4> dqget+0x155/0x1e7
 <c018a97b> dquot_transfer+0x3e0/0x3e9  <c016fe52> dput+0x23/0x13e
 <c01c7986> ext3_setattr+0xc3/0x240  <c0120f66> current_fs_time+0x52/0x6a
 <c017320e> notify_change+0x2bd/0x30d  <c0159246> chown_common+0x9c/0xc5
 <c02a222c> strncpy_from_user+0x3b/0x68  <c0167fe6> do_path_lookup+0xdf/0x266
 <c016841b> __user_walk_fd+0x44/0x5a  <c01592b9> sys_chown+0x4a/0x55
 <c015a43c> vfs_write+0xe7/0x13c  <c01695d4> sys_mkdir+0x1f/0x23
<c0102a97> syscall_call+0x7/0xb
I think its a bogus warning.
ext3_getblk() is calling ext3_get_blocks_handle() to map "1" block for
read. But for *some* reason ext3_get_blocks_handle() more than 1 block.
ext3_get_blocks_handle() return "positive #of blocks" is a valid case.
So needs to be fixed.

I'm having a hard time figuring out exactly what ext3_get_blocks_handle
is trying to return, but it looks to me like if it is allocating one
data block, and needs to allocate an indirect block as well, then it
will return 2 rather than 1.  Is this expected, or am I just confused?


It would return "1" in that case.. (data block)

> 0 means get_block() suceeded and indicates the number of blocks mapped
= 0 lookup failed
< 0 mean error case

I did search for callers of ext3_get_blocks_handle() and found that
ext3_readdir() seems to do wrong thing all the time with error check :(
Need to take a closer look..

	err = ext3_get_blocks_handle(NULL, inode, blk, 1,
                                                &map_bh, 0, 0);
        if (err > 0) {  <<<< BAD
                  page_cache_readahead(sb->s_bdev->bd_inode->i_mapping,
                                &filp->f_ra,
                                filp,
                                map_bh.b_blocknr >>
                                (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - inode->i_blkbits),
                                1);
                        bh = ext3_bread(NULL, inode, blk, 0, &err);
       }

Bad to do this what it's doing, or bad to call name the variable "err"?
I think if it looked like this:

	count = ext3_get_blocks_handle(NULL, inode, blk, 1,
                                                &map_bh, 0, 0);
if (count > 0) {
it would be a lot less confusing.
I am sorry !! it is doing the right thing :(


Thanks,
Badari

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux