assfail during unmount xfs 2.6.24.3 [from 2.6.24.y git]
During the final unmount before reboot there was an assertion failure from XFS leading to the debug output below; I've included what was available on the screendump, which I handwrote + transcribed. [I also have screenshots from a 2.1 MP camera -- they're slightly ugly but usable.] CONFIG_KEXEC was not compiled in, so I was uanble to get a crashdump via SysRq. I'm sending this along in case someone working on the XFS fs can find + fix a bug. I'm not sending the kernel config in this first post just as not to spam everybody with it if it's not needed -- if desired just ask and I'll send it. Source used: 2.6.24.y from git -- 2.6.24.3.
This is on my Desktop box, x86 system -- single P4 CPU @ 2.6 GHz, IDE disk attached to an onboard HighPoint HPT370 controller, and running Debian Sid.
When replying please CC me, as I am not currently subscribed to the list.
Cheers.
-- Chris
Signature · 78 lines
Chris Knadle [email protected] ------------------- Cleaning up ifdown.... Deactivating swap...done. Unmounting local filesystems...done. Assertion failed: atomic_read(&mp->m_active_trans) == 0, file: fs/xfs/xfs_vfsops.c, line: 708 ------------[ cut here ]------------ kernel BUG at fs/xfs/support/debug.c:82! infalid opcode: 0000 [#1] Modules lined in: nvidia(P) xt_multiport iptable_filter ip_tables x_tables ppdev lp ac battery ipv6 ext2 mbcache joydev sidewinder kqemu loop snd_emu10k1_synth snd_emux_synth snd_seq_virmidi snd_seq_midi_emul snd_emu10k1 firmware_class snd_ac97_codec ac97_bus snd_util_mem snd_hwdep parport_pc parport snd_pcm_oss snd_pcm snd_page_alloc snd_mixer_oss psmouse rtc snd_deq_dummy pcspkr serio_raw evdev snd_seq_oss snd_seq_midi snd_rawmidi snd_seq_midi_event snd_seq snd_timer snd_seq_device emu10k1_gp gameport snd soundcore button i2c_i801 i2c_core intel_agp iTCO_wdt agpart shpchp pci_hotplug usbhid hid xfs ide_cd cdrom ata_piix ata_generic libata scsi_mod ide_disk floppy uhci_hcd usbcore hpt366 e1000 piix generic ide_core thermal processor fan Pid: 25313, comm: mount Tainted: P (2.6.24.3-686-initrd-crk1 #1) EIP: 0060:[>f8a67a3f>] EFLAGS: 00010292 CPU: 0 EIP is at assfail+0x1b/0x1f [xfs] EAX: 00000061 EBX: f7faa400 ECX: ffffffff EDX: c034bda0 ESI: dfc97000 EDI: f7faa400 EBP: db175e14 ESP: db175dcc DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 0000 GS: 033 SS: 0068 Process mount (pid: 25313, ti=db174000 task=f7c32560 task.ti=db174000) Stack: f8a6cc60 f8a6c6b0 f8a6a135 000002c4 f8a57e38 f7faa400 f8a57ee7 00000000 dfc97000 f7faa400 db175e14 f8a66ebc 00000001 f8a7fd20 f7fbd400 00000000 00000001 c0162bd2 00000001 f7fbd43c ffffffff f7fbd400 c0174c1b 00000000 Call Trace: [<f8a57e38>] xfs_attr_quiesce+0x46/0x61 [xfs] [<f8a57ee7>] xfs_mntupdate+0x84/0xbb [xfs] [<f8a66ebc>] xfs_fs_remount+0x3d/0x57 [xfs] [<c0162bd2>] do_remount_sb+0xb5/0x101 [xfs] [<c0174c1b>] do_mount+0x5a9/0x65b [<c0148ec9>] __alloc_pages+0x5f/0x360 [<c014430c>] find_lock_page+0x15/0x67 [<c0150dd8>] handle_mm_fault+0x25a/0x52d [<c0148ec9>] __alloc_pages+0x5f/0x360 [<c0173707>] copy_mount_options+0x28/0x113 [<c0168b45>] getname+0x87/0xaf [<c0174d3f>] sys_mount+0x72/0xa4 [<c0103cf2>] sysenter_past_esp+0x5f/0x85 ======================= Code: d7 6b c7 83 c3 08 81 fb c8 02 a8 f8 75 ee 5b c3 83 ec 10 89 4c 24 0c 89 54 24 08 89 44 24 04 c7 04 24 60 cc a6 f8 e8 0d ed 6a c7 <0f> 0b eb fe 56 53 83 ec 0c 89 c6 83 e6 07 9c 5b fa 89 0c 24 89 EIP: [<f8a67a3f>] assfail+0x1b/0x1f [xfs] SS:ESP 0068:db175dcc ---[ end trace 65bd78ca1bf60304 ]--- WARNING: at kernel/exit.c:917 do_exit() Pid: 25313, comm: mount Tainted: P D 2.6.24.3-686-initrd-crk1 #1 [<c0118ceb>] do_exit+0x669/0x7a4 [<c0116767>] printk+0x1b/0x1f [<c010477a>] do_trap+0x0/0xbd [<c0104a56>] do_invalid_op+0x0/0x8a [<f8a67a3f>] assfail+0x1b/0x1f [xfs] [<f8a57e38>] xfs_attr_quiesce+0x46/0x61 [xfs] [<f8a57ee7>] xfs_mntupdate+0x84/0xbb [xfs] [<f8a66ebc>] xfs_fs_remount+0x3d/0x57 [xfs] [<c0162bd2>] do_remount_sb+0xb5/0x101 [<c0174c1b>] do_mount+0x5a9/0x65b [<c0148ec9>] __alloc_pages+0x5f/0x360 [<c014430c>] find_lock_page+0x15/0x67 [<c0150dd8>] handle_mm_fault+0x25a/0x52d [<c0148ec9>] __alloc_pages+0x5f/0x360 [<c0173707>] copy_mount_options+0x28/0x113 [<c0168b45>] getname+0x87/0xaf [<c0174d3f>] sys_mount+0x72/0xa4 [<c0103cf2>] sysenter_past_esp+0x5f/0x85 ======================== /etc/rc6.d/S60umountroot: line17: 25313 Segmentation fault mount $MOUNT_FORCE_OPT -n -o remount,ro -t dummytype dummydev / 2>/dev/null
Quoted 14 lines · Chris Knadle
During the final unmount before reboot there was an assertion failure from XFS leading to the debug output below; I've included what was available on the screendump, which I handwrote + transcribed. [I also have screenshots from a 2.1 MP camera -- they're slightly ugly but usable.]
CONFIG_KEXECwas not compiled in, so I was uanble to get a crashdump via SysRq. I'm sending this along in case someone working on the XFS fs can find + fix a bug. I'm not sending the kernel config in this first post just as not to spam everybody with it if it's not needed -- if desired just ask and I'll send it. Source used: 2.6.24.y from git -- 2.6.24.3.This is on my Desktop box, x86 system -- single P4 CPU @ 2.6 GHz, IDE disk attached to an onboard HighPoint HPT370 controller, and running Debian Sid.
When replying please CC me, as I am not currently subscribed to the list.
......
Quoted 2 lines
Assertion failed:
atomic_read(&mp->m_active_trans)== 0, file:fs/xfs/xfs_vfsops.c, line: 708
Known problem. Race in the VFS w.r.t. read-only remounts:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=120106649923499&w=2
The fix for the problem lies outside XFS:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=120109304227035&w=2
Cheers,
Dave.
Signature · 3 lines
Dave Chinner Principal Engineer SGI Australian Software Group
Quoted 3 lines · David Chinner
Quoted 2 lines · Chris Knadle
During the final unmount before reboot there was an assertion failure from XFS
...
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
When replying please CC me, as I am not currently subscribed to the list.
...
Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Assertion failed:
atomic_read(&mp->m_active_trans)== 0, file:fs/xfs/xfs_vfsops.c, line: 708
Thank you for taking the time to look and reply to this.
Quoted 3 lines
Known problem. Race in the VFS w.r.t. read-only remounts:
At the bottom of the above message there's a patch which is not currently
merged in either the linux-2.6.24.y.git or linux-2.6.git trees. That's perhaps as it should be, but I would like to know if it's worth trying merging the patch locally as an attempted workaround until such time as 2.6.25 is released and stable.
Quoted 3 lines
The fix for the problem lies outside XFS:
If I understand the above correctly, it sounds like the per-vfsmount is
going to be a new feature committed to 2.6.25, but probably not backported to prior kernel trees. If this feature was was added at 2.6.23.9 then if I understand corectly it's only an issue between that version and 2.6.25; is that correct?
Thanks again.
Cheers.
-- Chris
Signature · 2 lines
Chris Knadle [email protected]
Quoted 14 lines · Chris Knadle
Quoted 3 lines · David Chinner
Quoted 2 lines · Chris Knadle
During the final unmount before reboot there was an assertion failure from XFS
...
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
When replying please CC me, as I am not currently subscribed to the list.
...
Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Assertion failed:
atomic_read(&mp->m_active_trans)== 0, file:fs/xfs/xfs_vfsops.c, line: 708Thank you for taking the time to look and reply to this.
Quoted 2 lines
Known problem. Race in the VFS w.r.t. read-only remounts:
Quoted 7 lines
At the bottom of the above message there's a patch which is not currently
merged in either the linux-2.6.24.y.git or linux-2.6.git trees. That's perhaps as it should be, but I would like to know if it's worth trying merging the patch locally as an attempted workaround until such time as 2.6.25 is released and stable.
Sure, the patch is harmless - I've had it running in my local tree for quite some time now.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 4 lines
The fix for the problem lies outside XFS:
If I understand the above correctly, it sounds like the per-vfsmount is
going to be a new feature committed to 2.6.25, but probably not backported to prior kernel trees.
Right.
Quoted 3 lines
If this feature was was added at 2.6.23.9 then if I
understand corectly it's only an issue between that version and 2.6.25; is that correct?
Only if the per-vfsmount writer counts got merged in 2.6.25-rcX. I'm not sure that they did. Christoph?
Cheers,
Dave.
Signature · 3 lines
Dave Chinner Principal Engineer SGI Australian Software Group
Quoted 2 lines · David Chinner
Only if the per-vfsmount writer counts got merged in 2.6.25-rcX. I'm not sure that they did. Christoph?
No, it didn't go in. The new target is 2.6.26.