Re: 2.6.21-git10/11: files getting truncated on xfs? or maybe an nlink problem?

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

 



On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 07:13:48AM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 07:46:33AM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> > David Chinner wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 05:54:09PM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> > >   
> > >> David Chinner wrote:
> > >>     
> > >>> Suspend-resume, eh?
> > >>>
> > >>> There's an immediate suspect. Can you test this specifically for us?
> > >>> i.e. download a known good file set, do some stuff, suspend, resume,
> > >>> then check the files? If it doesn't show up the first time, can
> > >>> you do it a few times just to rule it out?
> > >>>       
> > >> Well, I've been doing suspend-resume with xfs for a while without
> > >> problems; the problems seem to be recent and easily repeatable.  Which
> > >> just means that it could be a new suspend-resume problem, of course.
> > >>     
> > >
> > > Ok. I'm just trying to find a relatively simple test case for the
> > > problem - seeing as you seem to be able to reliably reproduce this
> > > we should be able to work out the trigger...
> > >   
> > 
> > OK, I was able to reproduce it reliably with a script with did basically:
> > 
> >     for i in `seq 20`; do
> >     	hg clone -U --pull a b-$i
> >     	hg verify b-$i		# always OK
> >     	umount /home
> >     	sleep 5
> >     	mount /home
> >     	hg verify b-$i		# often found truncated files
> >     done
> >       
> > 
> > No suspend/resumes involved.  The trees are linux kernel ones, so fairly
> > large, but small enough to fit entirely in core.  My script also
> > captured xfs_bmap before/after output for files which had tended to be
> > corrupted in the past, but unfortunately none of them got corrupted in
> > these tests.  But I do have all the trees lying around to extract more
> > detail for if you like.
> 
> Ok, so most of the of the integrity errors are processed by an
> error like this:
> 
> drivers/scsi/sata_sil24.c index contains -98 extra bytes
> unpacking file drivers/scsi/sata_sil24.c 5715cdfceaca: Error -5 while decompressing data
> 
> That's an -EIO and not a normal error to report. Are there any
> errors in dmesg or syslog corresponding to this?
> 
> The errors tend to imply problems decompressing and patching files,
> not that truncates are occurring once the files have been patched.
> Can you check that what is being pulled from the repository is correct
> before it gets uncompressed?

Notice that verify gets run twice. Before unmount, it's fine, after
remount, it's not.

That message saying that the file contains -98 extra bytes is
Mercurial detecting the truncation before if tries to read and decompress the
truncated bit.

-- 
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
-
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