Skip to contentSkip to conversation

lvm - lvm_map access beyond end of device

linux-lvm Jeffrey Hundstad 1 participant 1 message Mar 9, 2001

lore
Share & tools
lore
#0 lore raw

Resent after subscribing to your list... original quoted in multiple replies.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: lvm - lvm_map access beyond end of device
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 23:01:33 -0600
From: Jeffrey Hundstad <[email protected]>
Organization: Minnesota State University, Mankato
To: Andreas Dilger <[email protected]>
CC: Linux Kernel Mailing List <[email protected]>,[email protected]
References: <[email protected]>

Quoted 4 lines · Andreas Dilger
Quoted 3 lines · Jeffrey Hundstad

After about 27 days of uptime one of our Linux machines that is being used as a Samba, Netatalk, and FTP server; the main data mount went into a read-only state.

Quoted 8 lines

[snip]

Quoted 1 line

We are mounting that 656GB disk as an EXT2 mount on /data.

As an aside, other than this problem, how do you find ext2 on such a large filesystem? So far this is the largest ext2 filesystem I've seen. Are you looking into ext3 at all to avoid fsck on crash? Granted, in this case you still needed to do the whole fsck but in other cases ext3 would help.

EXT2 is nice and snappy. This is our first crash... but the fsck was fun to watch ;) We
might switch if there is a stable alternative. I've used EXT3 on my personal system and it
worked fine, and it was really sweet to move from EXT2<->EXT3. Do you recommend it for a
production system? Why isn't it in 2.2.18 OR 2.4.x?

Quoted 22 lines
Quoted 7 lines

...during normal use we got events in our syslog (attached), also note the RAID controller showed no events. After a umount of the mounted filesystem, a reboot then a fsck the system worked fine. There were no bad reports from the fsck. Yes, I said no bad reports from fsck, it did take 3.5 hours though. What's causing this?

Quoted 14 lines
Mar  8 01:15:47 files kernel: lvm - lvm_map access beyond end of device;
*rsector: 2451636592 or size: 8 wrong for minor:  0
Mar  8 01:15:47 files kernel: Bad lvm_map in ll_rw_block
Mar  8 01:15:47 files kernel: EXT2-fs error (device lvm(58,0)):
ext2_readdir: bad entry in directory #43122713: rec_len is smaller than
minimal - offset=0, inode=0, rec_len=0, name_len=0
Mar  8 01:15:47 files kernel: Remounting filesystem read-only
Mar  8 01:15:48 files kernel: lvm - lvm_map access beyond end of device;
*rsector: 2596938272 or size: 8 wrong for minor:  0
Mar  8 01:15:48 files kernel: Bad lvm_map in ll_rw_block
Mar  8 01:15:48 files kernel: EXT2-fs error (device lvm(58,0)):
ext2_readdir: bad entry in directory #43122714: rec_len is smaller than
minimal - offset=0, inode=0, rec_len=0, name_len=0
Mar  8 01:15:48 files kernel: Remounting filesystem read-only
Quoted 4 lines

Is this the only output in your syslog, a representative sample, a small part of a huge number of messages? How often do you have this problem, or is it the first time?

This was a grep kernel of the days syslog file. I did take a look and it was the only thing
relevant.

Quoted 5 lines

Can you verify that inodes 43122713 and 43122714 are actually valid directories or at least valid inode numbers? dumpe2fs -h should be enough to tell you the number of inodes in the filesystem.

# dumpe2fs -h /dev/vg0/lv0
Filesystem volume name:   <none>
Last mounted on:          <not available>
Filesystem UUID:          1e473942-d8f1-4e48-905f-2f872f7e4424
Filesystem magic number:  0xEF53
Filesystem revision #:    1 (dynamic)
Filesystem features:      filetype sparse_super
Filesystem state:         not clean
Errors behavior:          Continue
Filesystem OS type:       Linux
Inode count:              87375872
Block count:              174723072
Reserved block count:     0
Free blocks:              163429202
Free inodes:              86687944
First block:              0
Block size:               4096
Fragment size:            4096
Blocks per group:         32768
Fragments per group:      32768
Inodes per group:         16384
Inode blocks per group:   512
Last mount time:          Thu Mar  8 12:28:00 2001
Last write time:          Thu Mar  8 22:42:13 2001
Mount count:              1
Maximum mount count:      20
Last checked:             Thu Mar  8 12:27:58 2001
Check interval:           15552000 (6 months)
Next check after:         Tue Sep  4 13:27:58 2001
Reserved blocks uid:      0 (user root)
Reserved blocks gid:      0 (group root)
First inode:              11
Inode size:               128
Quoted 13 lines

According to my calculations for your 656 GB 4kB block filesystem:

sector 2451636592 / 8 sectors/block = 306454574
sector 2596938272 / 8 sectors/block = 324617284

656 GB * 1024 MB/GB * 256 blocks/MB = 171966464 blocks

So LVM is correct in refusing to map these blocks. The real question is where do the block numbers come from? The "bad entry" messages are simply a result of LVM not filling in the buffer for ext2, and it is all zeros.

Quoted 7 lines

The first point where we could have a bogus block number would be in inode_getblk(), where we access inode->u.ext2_i.i_data[0] (the block number here is not checked), but you say that e2fsck reported all was well.

The below patch for 2.2.18 verifies the block numbers read from disk before reading them. It would at least help narrow down the problem here.

I'll see if I can add them in next reboot... which is tricky business with a 24x7 machine in
production. I'll insert this into 2.2.19 when it comes out.

Quoted 41 lines

Cheers, Andreas
========================================================================

ext2/inode.c Thu Mar 8 17:35:33 2001 renamed from ext2/inode.c.orig Wed Jan 17 03:22:51 2001 +9 -2
@@ -228,13 +228,20 @@
                                          int create, int new_block, int * err)
 {
        u32 * p;
-       int tmp, goal = 0;
+       u32 tmp, goal = 0;
        struct buffer_head * result;
        int blocks = inode->i_sb->s_blocksize / 512;
 
        p = inode->u.ext2_i.i_data + nr;
 repeat:
        tmp = *p;
+       if (tmp > le32_to_cpu(EXT2_SB(inode->i_sb)->s_es->s_blocks_count)) {
+               ext2_warning(inode->i_sb, __FUNCTION__,
+                            "inode #%u has bad direct block[%d] = %u\n",
+                            inode->i_ino, nr, tmp);
+               *err = -EIO;
+               return NULL;
+       }
        if (tmp) {
                struct buffer_head * result;
                result = getblk (inode->i_dev, le32_to_cpu(tmp), inode->i_sb->s_blocksize);
@@ -293,7 +301,7 @@
                                          int create, int blocksize,
                                          int new_block, int * err)
 {
-       int tmp, goal = 0;
+       u32 tmp, goal = 0;
        u32 * p;
        struct buffer_head * result;
        int blocks = inode->i_sb->s_blocksize / 512;
@@ -311,6 +319,13 @@
        p = (u32 *) bh->b_data + nr;
 repeat:
        tmp = le32_to_cpu(*p);

ext2/inode.c Thu Mar 8 17:35:33 2001 line 331

Quoted 10 lines
ext2/inode.c Thu Mar 8 17:35:33 2001 renamed from ext2/inode.c.orig Wed Jan 17 03:22:51 2001 +7 -0
+       if (tmp > le32_to_cpu(EXT2_SB(inode->i_sb)->s_es->s_blocks_count)) {
+               ext2_warning(inode->i_sb, __FUNCTION__,
+                            "inode #%u has bad indirect block[%u][%d] = %u\n",
+                            inode->i_ino, bh->b_blocknr, nr, tmp);
+               *err = -EIO;
+               return NULL;
+       }
        if (tmp) {
                result = getblk (bh->b_dev, tmp, blocksize);
                if (tmp == le32_to_cpu(*p)) {

-
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/