Patchwork s390x: kernel BUG at fs/ext4/inode.c:1591! (powerpc too!)

login
register
mail settings
Submitter Dmitri Monakho
Date April 3, 2013, 8:52 a.m.
Message ID <87li90q9mx.fsf@openvz.org>
Download mbox | patch
Permalink /patch/233309/
State Superseded
Headers show

Comments

Dmitri Monakho - April 3, 2013, 8:52 a.m.
On Tue, 2 Apr 2013 16:22:41 -0700 (PDT), Christian Kujau <lists@nerdbynature.de> wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Apr 2013 at 02:05, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
> > Please drop that patch and collect logs with a kernel which 
> > has only 0001-enable-ES_AGGRESSIVE_TEST-V2.patch patch applied
Ok I have found at least one issue.
Please give a try to this patch
> 
> I've applied (only) 0001-enable-ES_AGGRESSIVE_TEST-V2.patch to 3.9-rc4:
> 
>   patching file fs/ext4/extents_status.h
>   patching file fs/ext4/inode.c
>   Hunk #1 succeeded at 1588 (offset 42 lines).
>   Hunk #2 succeeded at 1609 (offset 42 lines).
> 
> And tried to download some images via bittorrent. As expected, lots of 
> "ES cache assertation failed" were being logged:
> 
>  http://nerdbynature.de/bits/3.9.0-rc4/ext4/
>  => messages_0001-enable-ES_AGGRESSIVE_TEST-V2.txt.xz
> 
> I've tried to download 3 files, all via bittorrent (so, fallocate & heavy 
> mmap)
> 
> 1) 8GB Fedora iso, there are also WARNINGs bring triggered, see below.
>    I decided to cancel the download after some gigabyes.
> 
> 2) A 50 MB Debian iso, this produced just one "ES cache assertation" 
>    message. Download went OK, checksum was correct too.
> 
> 3) A 221 MB Fedora iso, produced a couple of "ES cache assertation" 
>    messages, but no WARNINGs. Download went OK, checksum was correct too.
> 
> It's all in that messages_0001-enable-ES_AGGRESSIVE_TEST-V2.txt.xz file 
> above. I just e2fsck'ed the ext4 filesystem again (and did so last night), 
> but no errors were found.
> 
> HTH,
> Christian.
> 
> One of the WARNINGs during that 8GB download:
> 
>     ino:39190654 lbkl:0, b_state=0x0004b988, b_size=4131
>  ------------[ cut here ]------------
>  WARNING: at /opt/linux-git/fs/ext4/inode.c:1600
>  Modules linked in: md5 ecb nfs i2c_powermac therm_adt746x ecryptfs firewire_sbp2 arc4 b43 usb_storage mac80211 cfg80211
>  NIP: c013745c LR: c013745c CTR: c000df9c
>  REGS: edc479a0 TRAP: 0700   Tainted: G        W     (3.9.0-rc4-dirty)
>  MSR: 00029032 <EE,ME,IR,DR,RI>  CR: 44028644  XER: 20000000
>  TASK = edca9740[4379] 'flush-254:1' THREAD: edc46000
>  GPR00: c013745c edc47a50 edca9740 00000034 edca9db0 00000006 00000000 00008000
>  GPR08: 00003fb0 00218f23 00000000 c000006e 00000dc9 00000000 00000009 ee18cca0
>  GPR16: edc47c78 0000000e 0004b9bf 0004b988 00000000 edc47a84 00001000 e6357540
>  GPR24: edc47b78 e6357540 00000000 0004b97f 00000000 0051d188 00000000 0004b988
>  NIP [c013745c] mpage_da_submit_io+0x3dc/0x3f0
>  LR [c013745c] mpage_da_submit_io+0x3dc/0x3f0
>  Call Trace:
>  [edc47a50] [c013745c] mpage_da_submit_io+0x3dc/0x3f0 (unreliable)
>  [edc47b30] [c013c9f0] mpage_da_map_and_submit+0x16c/0x5f0
>  [edc47bc0] [c013d2e4] write_cache_pages_da+0x470/0x480
>  [edc47c70] [c013d554] ext4_da_writepages+0x260/0x49c
>  [edc47d20] [c00eeea0] __writeback_single_inode+0x34/0x120
>  [edc47d40] [c00ef508] writeback_sb_inodes+0x1fc/0x34c
>  [edc47db0] [c00ef6e4] __writeback_inodes_wb+0x8c/0xd0
>  [edc47de0] [c00efa90] wb_writeback+0x1b4/0x1bc
>  [edc47e20] [c00f06d0] wb_do_writeback+0x1ec/0x1f4
>  [edc47e80] [c00f0748] bdi_writeback_thread+0x70/0x140
>  [edc47eb0] [c0051c18] kthread+0xa8/0xac
>  [edc47f40] [c00106cc] ret_from_kernel_thread+0x64/0x6c
>  --- Exception: 0 at   (null)
>      LR =   (null)
>  Instruction dump:
> 
> -- 
> BOFH excuse #61:
> 
> not approved by the FCC
Dmitri Monakho - April 3, 2013, 9:53 a.m.
On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 12:52:06 +0400, Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@openvz.org> wrote:
Non-text part: multipart/mixed
> On Tue, 2 Apr 2013 16:22:41 -0700 (PDT), Christian Kujau <lists@nerdbynature.de> wrote:
> > On Wed, 3 Apr 2013 at 02:05, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
> > > Please drop that patch and collect logs with a kernel which 
> > > has only 0001-enable-ES_AGGRESSIVE_TEST-V2.patch patch applied
> Ok I have found at least one issue.
Yeah.. My college advise me to use sparse in order to spot all
cpu_to_ondisk format conversion
make C=2 CF="-D__CHECK_ENDIAN__" fs/ext4/ 
And it spotted a huge amount of issues. Which tell us that we are deeply
in shit.
<stdin>:1220:2: warning: #warning syscall kcmp not implemented
<stdin>:1223:2: warning: #warning syscall finit_module not implemented
fs/ext4/ialloc.c:902:37: warning: symbol 'sbi' shadows an earlier one
fs/ext4/ialloc.c:650:29: originally declared here
fs/ext4/inode.c:58:17: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
fs/ext4/inode.c:58:17:    expected unsigned short [unsigned] [usertype] csum_lo
fs/ext4/inode.c:58:17:    got restricted __le16 [usertype] l_i_checksum_lo
fs/ext4/inode.c:62:25: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
fs/ext4/inode.c:62:25:    expected unsigned short [unsigned] [usertype] csum_hi
fs/ext4/inode.c:62:25:    got restricted __le16 [usertype] i_checksum_hi
fs/ext4/inode.c:69:28: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
fs/ext4/inode.c:69:28:    expected restricted __le16 [usertype] l_i_checksum_lo
fs/ext4/inode.c:69:28:    got unsigned short [unsigned] [usertype] csum_lo
fs/ext4/inode.c:72:36: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
fs/ext4/inode.c:72:36:    expected restricted __le16 [usertype] i_checksum_hi
fs/ext4/inode.c:72:36:    got unsigned short [unsigned] [usertype] csum_hi
include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
fs/ext4/ioctl.c:358:36: warning: symbol 'sb' shadows an earlier one
fs/ext4/ioctl.c:26:28: originally declared here
fs/ext4/namei.c:2008:36: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
fs/ext4/namei.c:423:18: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
fs/ext4/namei.c:423:18:    expected unsigned int [unsigned] [usertype] old_csum
fs/ext4/namei.c:423:18:    got restricted __le32 [usertype] dt_checksum
fs/ext4/namei.c:427:24: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
fs/ext4/namei.c:427:24:    expected restricted __le32 [usertype] dt_checksum
fs/ext4/namei.c:427:24:    got unsigned int [unsigned] [usertype] old_csum
include/trace/events/ext4.h:1926:1: warning: cast from restricted __le32
include/trace/events/ext4.h:1926:1: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
include/trace/events/ext4.h:1926:1:    expected unsigned int [unsigned] [usertype] ee_lblk
include/trace/events/ext4.h:1926:1:    got restricted __le32 [usertype] <noident>
include/trace/events/ext4.h:1926:1: warning: cast from restricted __le32
include/trace/events/ext4.h:1926:1: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
include/trace/events/ext4.h:1926:1:    expected unsigned int [unsigned] [usertype] ee_lblk
include/trace/events/ext4.h:1926:1:    got restricted __le32 [usertype] <noident>
fs/ext4/super.c:1957:26: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
fs/ext4/super.c:1957:26:    expected unsigned short [unsigned] [usertype] old_csum
fs/ext4/super.c:1957:26:    got restricted __le16 [usertype] bg_checksum
fs/ext4/super.c:1963:34: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
fs/ext4/super.c:1963:34:    expected restricted __le16 [usertype] bg_checksum
fs/ext4/super.c:1963:34:    got unsigned short [unsigned] [usertype] old_csum
include/uapi/linux/swab.h:60:16: error: undefined identifier '__builtin_bswap32'
include/uapi/linux/swab.h:60:33: error: not a function <noident>
fs/ext4/extents.c:3002:48: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
fs/ext4/extents.c:3002:48:    expected restricted __le16 [assigned] [usertype] ee_len
fs/ext4/extents.c:3002:48:    got restricted __be16 [usertype] <noident>
fs/ext4/extents.c:3008:48: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
fs/ext4/extents.c:3008:48:    expected restricted __le16 [addressable] [assigned] [usertype] ee_len
fs/ext4/extents.c:3008:48:    got restricted __be16 [usertype] <noident>
fs/ext4/extents.c:3015:40: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
fs/ext4/extents.c:3015:40:    expected restricted __le16 [addressable] [assigned] [usertype] ee_len
fs/ext4/extents.c:3015:40:    got restricted __be16 [usertype] <noident>
fs/ext4/extents.c:603:28: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
fs/ext4/extents.c:671:28: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
fs/ext4/extents.c:849:43: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
fs/ext4/extents.c:984:47: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
fs/ext4/extents.c:1063:50: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
fs/ext4/extents.c:1656:52: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
fs/ext4/extents.c:1706:32: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
fs/ext4/extents.c:1929:43: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
fs/ext4/extents.c:2206:55: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
fs/ext4/extents.c:2528:72: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
fs/ext4/extents.c:2787:36: warning: incorrect type in argument 5 (different base types)
fs/ext4/extents.c:2787:36:    expected unsigned short [unsigned] eh_entries
fs/ext4/extents.c:2787:36:    got restricted __le16 [usertype] eh_entries
fs/ext4/extents.c:3275:32: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
fs/ext4/extents.c:3275:32:    expected restricted __le16 [assigned] [usertype] ee_len
fs/ext4/extents.c:3275:32:    got restricted __be16 [usertype] <noident>
fs/ext4/extents.c:4642:34: warning: cast from restricted __le16
fs/ext4/extents.c:4642:34: warning: incorrect type in argument 1 (different base types)
fs/ext4/extents.c:4642:34:    expected unsigned short [unsigned] [usertype] val
fs/ext4/extents.c:4642:34:    got restricted __le16 [usertype] eh_entries
fs/ext4/extents.c:4642:34: warning: cast from restricted __le16
fs/ext4/extents.c:4642:34: warning: cast from restricted __le16
fs/ext4/extents.c:4642:34: warning: restricted __be16 degrades to integer
fs/ext4/mballoc.c:863:21: warning: symbol 'group' shadows an earlier one
fs/ext4/mballoc.c:795:35: originally declared here
include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
fs/ext4/mballoc.c:4855:9: warning: context imbalance in 'ext4_trim_extent' - unexpected unlock
fs/ext4/move_extent.c:859:29: warning: symbol 'err' shadows an earlier one
fs/ext4/move_extent.c:835:16: originally declared here
include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
fs/ext4/mmp.c:18:16: warning: incorrect type in return expression (different base types)
fs/ext4/mmp.c:18:16:    expected unsigned int
fs/ext4/mmp.c:18:16:    got restricted __le32 [usertype] <noident>
fs/ext4/mmp.c:27:19: warning: restricted __le32 degrades to integer
fs/ext4/mmp.c:36:27: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
fs/ext4/mmp.c:36:27:    expected restricted __le32 [usertype] mmp_checksum
fs/ext4/mmp.c:36:27:    got unsigned int
fs/ext4/indirect.c:579:41: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
fs/ext4/indirect.c:592:52: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
fs/ext4/indirect.c:1257:68: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
fs/ext4/indirect.c:1268:67: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
fs/ext4/indirect.c:1275:48: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
fs/ext4/indirect.c:1327:52: warning: incorrect type in argument 2 (different base types)
fs/ext4/indirect.c:1327:52:    expected unsigned long [unsigned] [usertype] block
fs/ext4/indirect.c:1327:52:    got restricted __le32 [assigned] [usertype] blk
fs/ext4/indirect.c:1329:33: warning: incorrect type in argument 4 (different base types)
fs/ext4/indirect.c:1329:33:    expected unsigned long long [unsigned] [usertype] <noident>
fs/ext4/indirect.c:1329:33:    got restricted __le32 [assigned] [usertype] blk
fs/ext4/xattr.c:127:13: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
fs/ext4/xattr.c:127:13:    expected unsigned int [unsigned] [usertype] old
fs/ext4/xattr.c:127:13:    got restricted __le32 [usertype] h_checksum
fs/ext4/xattr.c:129:18: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
fs/ext4/xattr.c:129:18:    expected unsigned long [unsigned] [usertype] block_nr
fs/ext4/xattr.c:129:18:    got restricted __le64 [usertype] <noident>
fs/ext4/xattr.c:135:25: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
fs/ext4/xattr.c:135:25:    expected restricted __le32 [usertype] h_checksum
fs/ext4/xattr.c:135:25:    got unsigned int [unsigned] [usertype] old
include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
So please give me couple of hours and I'll send you a complete patch.


> Please give a try to this patch
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents.c b/fs/ext4/extents.c
> index 1530cf4..e8460f6 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/extents.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/extents.c
> @@ -3272,7 +3272,7 @@ static int ext4_ext_convert_to_initialized(handle_t *handle,
>  		if (err)
>  			goto out;
>  		zero_ex.ee_block = ex->ee_block;
> -		zero_ex.ee_len = ext4_ext_get_actual_len(ex);
> +		zero_ex.ee_len = cpu_to_le16(ext4_ext_get_actual_len(ext));
>  		ext4_ext_store_pblock(&zero_ex, ext4_ext_pblock(ex));
>  
>  		err = ext4_ext_get_access(handle, inode, path + depth);
> 
> > 
> > I've applied (only) 0001-enable-ES_AGGRESSIVE_TEST-V2.patch to 3.9-rc4:
> > 
> >   patching file fs/ext4/extents_status.h
> >   patching file fs/ext4/inode.c
> >   Hunk #1 succeeded at 1588 (offset 42 lines).
> >   Hunk #2 succeeded at 1609 (offset 42 lines).
> > 
> > And tried to download some images via bittorrent. As expected, lots of 
> > "ES cache assertation failed" were being logged:
> > 
> >  http://nerdbynature.de/bits/3.9.0-rc4/ext4/
> >  => messages_0001-enable-ES_AGGRESSIVE_TEST-V2.txt.xz
> > 
> > I've tried to download 3 files, all via bittorrent (so, fallocate & heavy 
> > mmap)
> > 
> > 1) 8GB Fedora iso, there are also WARNINGs bring triggered, see below.
> >    I decided to cancel the download after some gigabyes.
> > 
> > 2) A 50 MB Debian iso, this produced just one "ES cache assertation" 
> >    message. Download went OK, checksum was correct too.
> > 
> > 3) A 221 MB Fedora iso, produced a couple of "ES cache assertation" 
> >    messages, but no WARNINGs. Download went OK, checksum was correct too.
> > 
> > It's all in that messages_0001-enable-ES_AGGRESSIVE_TEST-V2.txt.xz file 
> > above. I just e2fsck'ed the ext4 filesystem again (and did so last night), 
> > but no errors were found.
> > 
> > HTH,
> > Christian.
> > 
> > One of the WARNINGs during that 8GB download:
> > 
> >     ino:39190654 lbkl:0, b_state=0x0004b988, b_size=4131
> >  ------------[ cut here ]------------
> >  WARNING: at /opt/linux-git/fs/ext4/inode.c:1600
> >  Modules linked in: md5 ecb nfs i2c_powermac therm_adt746x ecryptfs firewire_sbp2 arc4 b43 usb_storage mac80211 cfg80211
> >  NIP: c013745c LR: c013745c CTR: c000df9c
> >  REGS: edc479a0 TRAP: 0700   Tainted: G        W     (3.9.0-rc4-dirty)
> >  MSR: 00029032 <EE,ME,IR,DR,RI>  CR: 44028644  XER: 20000000
> >  TASK = edca9740[4379] 'flush-254:1' THREAD: edc46000
> >  GPR00: c013745c edc47a50 edca9740 00000034 edca9db0 00000006 00000000 00008000
> >  GPR08: 00003fb0 00218f23 00000000 c000006e 00000dc9 00000000 00000009 ee18cca0
> >  GPR16: edc47c78 0000000e 0004b9bf 0004b988 00000000 edc47a84 00001000 e6357540
> >  GPR24: edc47b78 e6357540 00000000 0004b97f 00000000 0051d188 00000000 0004b988
> >  NIP [c013745c] mpage_da_submit_io+0x3dc/0x3f0
> >  LR [c013745c] mpage_da_submit_io+0x3dc/0x3f0
> >  Call Trace:
> >  [edc47a50] [c013745c] mpage_da_submit_io+0x3dc/0x3f0 (unreliable)
> >  [edc47b30] [c013c9f0] mpage_da_map_and_submit+0x16c/0x5f0
> >  [edc47bc0] [c013d2e4] write_cache_pages_da+0x470/0x480
> >  [edc47c70] [c013d554] ext4_da_writepages+0x260/0x49c
> >  [edc47d20] [c00eeea0] __writeback_single_inode+0x34/0x120
> >  [edc47d40] [c00ef508] writeback_sb_inodes+0x1fc/0x34c
> >  [edc47db0] [c00ef6e4] __writeback_inodes_wb+0x8c/0xd0
> >  [edc47de0] [c00efa90] wb_writeback+0x1b4/0x1bc
> >  [edc47e20] [c00f06d0] wb_do_writeback+0x1ec/0x1f4
> >  [edc47e80] [c00f0748] bdi_writeback_thread+0x70/0x140
> >  [edc47eb0] [c0051c18] kthread+0xa8/0xac
> >  [edc47f40] [c00106cc] ret_from_kernel_thread+0x64/0x6c
> >  --- Exception: 0 at   (null)
> >      LR =   (null)
> >  Instruction dump:
> > 
> > -- 
> > BOFH excuse #61:
> > 
> > not approved by the FCC
Dmitri Monakho - April 3, 2013, 11:02 a.m.
On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 13:53:49 +0400, Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@openvz.org> wrote:
Non-text part: multipart/mixed
> On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 12:52:06 +0400, Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@openvz.org> wrote:
> Non-text part: multipart/mixed
> > On Tue, 2 Apr 2013 16:22:41 -0700 (PDT), Christian Kujau <lists@nerdbynature.de> wrote:
> > > On Wed, 3 Apr 2013 at 02:05, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
> > > > Please drop that patch and collect logs with a kernel which 
> > > > has only 0001-enable-ES_AGGRESSIVE_TEST-V2.patch patch applied
Good news big endian cpu owners
Please try following patches(second is most important):
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/233396/
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/233397/
I hope this should fix all known issues
> > Ok I have found at least one issue.
> Yeah.. My college advise me to use sparse in order to spot all
> cpu_to_ondisk format conversion
> make C=2 CF="-D__CHECK_ENDIAN__" fs/ext4/ 
> And it spotted a huge amount of issues. Which tell us that we are deeply
> in shit.
> <stdin>:1220:2: warning: #warning syscall kcmp not implemented
> <stdin>:1223:2: warning: #warning syscall finit_module not implemented
> fs/ext4/ialloc.c:902:37: warning: symbol 'sbi' shadows an earlier one
> fs/ext4/ialloc.c:650:29: originally declared here
> fs/ext4/inode.c:58:17: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
> fs/ext4/inode.c:58:17:    expected unsigned short [unsigned] [usertype] csum_lo
> fs/ext4/inode.c:58:17:    got restricted __le16 [usertype] l_i_checksum_lo
> fs/ext4/inode.c:62:25: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
> fs/ext4/inode.c:62:25:    expected unsigned short [unsigned] [usertype] csum_hi
> fs/ext4/inode.c:62:25:    got restricted __le16 [usertype] i_checksum_hi
> fs/ext4/inode.c:69:28: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
> fs/ext4/inode.c:69:28:    expected restricted __le16 [usertype] l_i_checksum_lo
> fs/ext4/inode.c:69:28:    got unsigned short [unsigned] [usertype] csum_lo
> fs/ext4/inode.c:72:36: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
> fs/ext4/inode.c:72:36:    expected restricted __le16 [usertype] i_checksum_hi
> fs/ext4/inode.c:72:36:    got unsigned short [unsigned] [usertype] csum_hi
> include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> fs/ext4/ioctl.c:358:36: warning: symbol 'sb' shadows an earlier one
> fs/ext4/ioctl.c:26:28: originally declared here
> fs/ext4/namei.c:2008:36: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> fs/ext4/namei.c:423:18: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
> fs/ext4/namei.c:423:18:    expected unsigned int [unsigned] [usertype] old_csum
> fs/ext4/namei.c:423:18:    got restricted __le32 [usertype] dt_checksum
> fs/ext4/namei.c:427:24: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
> fs/ext4/namei.c:427:24:    expected restricted __le32 [usertype] dt_checksum
> fs/ext4/namei.c:427:24:    got unsigned int [unsigned] [usertype] old_csum
> include/trace/events/ext4.h:1926:1: warning: cast from restricted __le32
> include/trace/events/ext4.h:1926:1: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
> include/trace/events/ext4.h:1926:1:    expected unsigned int [unsigned] [usertype] ee_lblk
> include/trace/events/ext4.h:1926:1:    got restricted __le32 [usertype] <noident>
> include/trace/events/ext4.h:1926:1: warning: cast from restricted __le32
> include/trace/events/ext4.h:1926:1: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
> include/trace/events/ext4.h:1926:1:    expected unsigned int [unsigned] [usertype] ee_lblk
> include/trace/events/ext4.h:1926:1:    got restricted __le32 [usertype] <noident>
> fs/ext4/super.c:1957:26: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
> fs/ext4/super.c:1957:26:    expected unsigned short [unsigned] [usertype] old_csum
> fs/ext4/super.c:1957:26:    got restricted __le16 [usertype] bg_checksum
> fs/ext4/super.c:1963:34: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
> fs/ext4/super.c:1963:34:    expected restricted __le16 [usertype] bg_checksum
> fs/ext4/super.c:1963:34:    got unsigned short [unsigned] [usertype] old_csum
> include/uapi/linux/swab.h:60:16: error: undefined identifier '__builtin_bswap32'
> include/uapi/linux/swab.h:60:33: error: not a function <noident>
> fs/ext4/extents.c:3002:48: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
> fs/ext4/extents.c:3002:48:    expected restricted __le16 [assigned] [usertype] ee_len
> fs/ext4/extents.c:3002:48:    got restricted __be16 [usertype] <noident>
> fs/ext4/extents.c:3008:48: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
> fs/ext4/extents.c:3008:48:    expected restricted __le16 [addressable] [assigned] [usertype] ee_len
> fs/ext4/extents.c:3008:48:    got restricted __be16 [usertype] <noident>
> fs/ext4/extents.c:3015:40: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
> fs/ext4/extents.c:3015:40:    expected restricted __le16 [addressable] [assigned] [usertype] ee_len
> fs/ext4/extents.c:3015:40:    got restricted __be16 [usertype] <noident>
> fs/ext4/extents.c:603:28: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> fs/ext4/extents.c:671:28: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> fs/ext4/extents.c:849:43: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> fs/ext4/extents.c:984:47: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> fs/ext4/extents.c:1063:50: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> fs/ext4/extents.c:1656:52: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> fs/ext4/extents.c:1706:32: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> fs/ext4/extents.c:1929:43: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> fs/ext4/extents.c:2206:55: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> fs/ext4/extents.c:2528:72: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> fs/ext4/extents.c:2787:36: warning: incorrect type in argument 5 (different base types)
> fs/ext4/extents.c:2787:36:    expected unsigned short [unsigned] eh_entries
> fs/ext4/extents.c:2787:36:    got restricted __le16 [usertype] eh_entries
> fs/ext4/extents.c:3275:32: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
> fs/ext4/extents.c:3275:32:    expected restricted __le16 [assigned] [usertype] ee_len
> fs/ext4/extents.c:3275:32:    got restricted __be16 [usertype] <noident>
> fs/ext4/extents.c:4642:34: warning: cast from restricted __le16
> fs/ext4/extents.c:4642:34: warning: incorrect type in argument 1 (different base types)
> fs/ext4/extents.c:4642:34:    expected unsigned short [unsigned] [usertype] val
> fs/ext4/extents.c:4642:34:    got restricted __le16 [usertype] eh_entries
> fs/ext4/extents.c:4642:34: warning: cast from restricted __le16
> fs/ext4/extents.c:4642:34: warning: cast from restricted __le16
> fs/ext4/extents.c:4642:34: warning: restricted __be16 degrades to integer
> fs/ext4/mballoc.c:863:21: warning: symbol 'group' shadows an earlier one
> fs/ext4/mballoc.c:795:35: originally declared here
> include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> fs/ext4/mballoc.c:4855:9: warning: context imbalance in 'ext4_trim_extent' - unexpected unlock
> fs/ext4/move_extent.c:859:29: warning: symbol 'err' shadows an earlier one
> fs/ext4/move_extent.c:835:16: originally declared here
> include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> fs/ext4/mmp.c:18:16: warning: incorrect type in return expression (different base types)
> fs/ext4/mmp.c:18:16:    expected unsigned int
> fs/ext4/mmp.c:18:16:    got restricted __le32 [usertype] <noident>
> fs/ext4/mmp.c:27:19: warning: restricted __le32 degrades to integer
> fs/ext4/mmp.c:36:27: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
> fs/ext4/mmp.c:36:27:    expected restricted __le32 [usertype] mmp_checksum
> fs/ext4/mmp.c:36:27:    got unsigned int
> fs/ext4/indirect.c:579:41: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> fs/ext4/indirect.c:592:52: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> fs/ext4/indirect.c:1257:68: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> fs/ext4/indirect.c:1268:67: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> fs/ext4/indirect.c:1275:48: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> fs/ext4/indirect.c:1327:52: warning: incorrect type in argument 2 (different base types)
> fs/ext4/indirect.c:1327:52:    expected unsigned long [unsigned] [usertype] block
> fs/ext4/indirect.c:1327:52:    got restricted __le32 [assigned] [usertype] blk
> fs/ext4/indirect.c:1329:33: warning: incorrect type in argument 4 (different base types)
> fs/ext4/indirect.c:1329:33:    expected unsigned long long [unsigned] [usertype] <noident>
> fs/ext4/indirect.c:1329:33:    got restricted __le32 [assigned] [usertype] blk
> fs/ext4/xattr.c:127:13: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
> fs/ext4/xattr.c:127:13:    expected unsigned int [unsigned] [usertype] old
> fs/ext4/xattr.c:127:13:    got restricted __le32 [usertype] h_checksum
> fs/ext4/xattr.c:129:18: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
> fs/ext4/xattr.c:129:18:    expected unsigned long [unsigned] [usertype] block_nr
> fs/ext4/xattr.c:129:18:    got restricted __le64 [usertype] <noident>
> fs/ext4/xattr.c:135:25: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
> fs/ext4/xattr.c:135:25:    expected restricted __le32 [usertype] h_checksum
> fs/ext4/xattr.c:135:25:    got unsigned int [unsigned] [usertype] old
> include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> include/linux/mm.h:759:16: warning: potentially expensive pointer subtraction
> So please give me couple of hours and I'll send you a complete patch.
> 
> 
> > Please give a try to this patch
> > diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents.c b/fs/ext4/extents.c
> > index 1530cf4..e8460f6 100644
> > --- a/fs/ext4/extents.c
> > +++ b/fs/ext4/extents.c
> > @@ -3272,7 +3272,7 @@ static int ext4_ext_convert_to_initialized(handle_t *handle,
> >  		if (err)
> >  			goto out;
> >  		zero_ex.ee_block = ex->ee_block;
> > -		zero_ex.ee_len = ext4_ext_get_actual_len(ex);
> > +		zero_ex.ee_len = cpu_to_le16(ext4_ext_get_actual_len(ext));
> >  		ext4_ext_store_pblock(&zero_ex, ext4_ext_pblock(ex));
> >  
> >  		err = ext4_ext_get_access(handle, inode, path + depth);
> > 
> > > 
> > > I've applied (only) 0001-enable-ES_AGGRESSIVE_TEST-V2.patch to 3.9-rc4:
> > > 
> > >   patching file fs/ext4/extents_status.h
> > >   patching file fs/ext4/inode.c
> > >   Hunk #1 succeeded at 1588 (offset 42 lines).
> > >   Hunk #2 succeeded at 1609 (offset 42 lines).
> > > 
> > > And tried to download some images via bittorrent. As expected, lots of 
> > > "ES cache assertation failed" were being logged:
> > > 
> > >  http://nerdbynature.de/bits/3.9.0-rc4/ext4/
> > >  => messages_0001-enable-ES_AGGRESSIVE_TEST-V2.txt.xz
> > > 
> > > I've tried to download 3 files, all via bittorrent (so, fallocate & heavy 
> > > mmap)
> > > 
> > > 1) 8GB Fedora iso, there are also WARNINGs bring triggered, see below.
> > >    I decided to cancel the download after some gigabyes.
> > > 
> > > 2) A 50 MB Debian iso, this produced just one "ES cache assertation" 
> > >    message. Download went OK, checksum was correct too.
> > > 
> > > 3) A 221 MB Fedora iso, produced a couple of "ES cache assertation" 
> > >    messages, but no WARNINGs. Download went OK, checksum was correct too.
> > > 
> > > It's all in that messages_0001-enable-ES_AGGRESSIVE_TEST-V2.txt.xz file 
> > > above. I just e2fsck'ed the ext4 filesystem again (and did so last night), 
> > > but no errors were found.
> > > 
> > > HTH,
> > > Christian.
> > > 
> > > One of the WARNINGs during that 8GB download:
> > > 
> > >     ino:39190654 lbkl:0, b_state=0x0004b988, b_size=4131
> > >  ------------[ cut here ]------------
> > >  WARNING: at /opt/linux-git/fs/ext4/inode.c:1600
> > >  Modules linked in: md5 ecb nfs i2c_powermac therm_adt746x ecryptfs firewire_sbp2 arc4 b43 usb_storage mac80211 cfg80211
> > >  NIP: c013745c LR: c013745c CTR: c000df9c
> > >  REGS: edc479a0 TRAP: 0700   Tainted: G        W     (3.9.0-rc4-dirty)
> > >  MSR: 00029032 <EE,ME,IR,DR,RI>  CR: 44028644  XER: 20000000
> > >  TASK = edca9740[4379] 'flush-254:1' THREAD: edc46000
> > >  GPR00: c013745c edc47a50 edca9740 00000034 edca9db0 00000006 00000000 00008000
> > >  GPR08: 00003fb0 00218f23 00000000 c000006e 00000dc9 00000000 00000009 ee18cca0
> > >  GPR16: edc47c78 0000000e 0004b9bf 0004b988 00000000 edc47a84 00001000 e6357540
> > >  GPR24: edc47b78 e6357540 00000000 0004b97f 00000000 0051d188 00000000 0004b988
> > >  NIP [c013745c] mpage_da_submit_io+0x3dc/0x3f0
> > >  LR [c013745c] mpage_da_submit_io+0x3dc/0x3f0
> > >  Call Trace:
> > >  [edc47a50] [c013745c] mpage_da_submit_io+0x3dc/0x3f0 (unreliable)
> > >  [edc47b30] [c013c9f0] mpage_da_map_and_submit+0x16c/0x5f0
> > >  [edc47bc0] [c013d2e4] write_cache_pages_da+0x470/0x480
> > >  [edc47c70] [c013d554] ext4_da_writepages+0x260/0x49c
> > >  [edc47d20] [c00eeea0] __writeback_single_inode+0x34/0x120
> > >  [edc47d40] [c00ef508] writeback_sb_inodes+0x1fc/0x34c
> > >  [edc47db0] [c00ef6e4] __writeback_inodes_wb+0x8c/0xd0
> > >  [edc47de0] [c00efa90] wb_writeback+0x1b4/0x1bc
> > >  [edc47e20] [c00f06d0] wb_do_writeback+0x1ec/0x1f4
> > >  [edc47e80] [c00f0748] bdi_writeback_thread+0x70/0x140
> > >  [edc47eb0] [c0051c18] kthread+0xa8/0xac
> > >  [edc47f40] [c00106cc] ret_from_kernel_thread+0x64/0x6c
> > >  --- Exception: 0 at   (null)
> > >      LR =   (null)
> > >  Instruction dump:
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > BOFH excuse #61:
> > > 
> > > not approved by the FCC
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Dmitri Monakho - April 3, 2013, 4:50 p.m.
On Wed, 3 Apr 2013 09:46:56 -0700 (PDT), Christian Kujau <lists@nerdbynature.de> wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Apr 2013 at 15:02, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
> > Good news big endian cpu owners
> > Please try following patches(second is most important):
> > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/233396/
> > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/233397/
> > I hope this should fix all known issues
> 
> Zheng Liu also sent a patch:
> 
>   [PATCH] ext4: fix a big-endian bug when an extent is zeroed out
> 
> When I try to apply all three of those to 3.9-4c4, the 2nd one from Dmitry 
> fails:
Yes. becase my patch was against ext4.git/dev so just ignore it.
Teodore have sent a patch http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/233555/
This is most probable candidate for final fix.
> 
> $ cat ~/dev/002-ext4_fix-cpu_vs_disk-conversions.diff | patch --dry-run -p1
> patching file fs/ext4/extents.c
> Hunk #2 FAILED at 2999.
> Hunk #3 FAILED at 3272.
> Hunk #4 FAILED at 4639.
> 3 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file fs/ext4/extents.c.rej
> patching file fs/ext4/indirect.c
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 1539 (offset 215 lines).
> patching file fs/ext4/inode.c
> patching file fs/ext4/mmp.c
> patching file fs/ext4/namei.c
> patching file fs/ext4/super.c
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 1951 (offset -3 lines).
> patching file fs/ext4/xattr.c
> patching file include/trace/events/ext4.h
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 1956 (offset 8 lines).
> Hunk #2 succeeded at 2060 (offset 8 lines).
> Hunk #3 succeeded at 2079 (offset 8 lines).
> 
> With only Dimitry's patchesm this happens, to -rc4:
> 
> $ cat ~/dev/001-ext4_fix-usless-declarations.diff | patch -p1
> patching file fs/ext4/ialloc.c
> patching file fs/ext4/ioctl.c
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 359 (offset 4 lines).
> patching file fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> patching file fs/ext4/move_extent.c
> 
> $ cat ~/dev/002-ext4_fix-cpu_vs_disk-conversions.diff | patch --dry-run -p1
> patching file fs/ext4/extents.c
> Hunk #4 FAILED at 4639.
> 1 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file fs/ext4/extents.c.rej
> patching file fs/ext4/indirect.c
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 1539 (offset 215 lines).
> patching file fs/ext4/inode.c
> patching file fs/ext4/mmp.c
> patching file fs/ext4/namei.c
> patching file fs/ext4/super.c
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 1951 (offset -3 lines).
> patching file fs/ext4/xattr.c
> patching file include/trace/events/ext4.h
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 1956 (offset 8 lines).
> Hunk #2 succeeded at 2060 (offset 8 lines).
> Hunk #3 succeeded at 2079 (offset 8 lines).
> 
> 
> Christian.
> -- 
> BOFH excuse #451:
> 
> astropneumatic oscillations in the water-cooling
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Zheng Liu - April 3, 2013, 4:52 p.m.
On 04/04/2013 12:46 AM, Christian Kujau wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Apr 2013 at 15:02, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
>> Good news big endian cpu owners
>> Please try following patches(second is most important):
>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/233396/
>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/233397/
>> I hope this should fix all known issues
> 
> Zheng Liu also sent a patch:
> 
>   [PATCH] ext4: fix a big-endian bug when an extent is zeroed out
> 
> When I try to apply all three of those to 3.9-4c4, the 2nd one from Dmitry 
> fails:
> 
> $ cat ~/dev/002-ext4_fix-cpu_vs_disk-conversions.diff | patch --dry-run -p1
> patching file fs/ext4/extents.c
> Hunk #2 FAILED at 2999.
> Hunk #3 FAILED at 3272.
> Hunk #4 FAILED at 4639.
> 3 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file fs/ext4/extents.c.rej
> patching file fs/ext4/indirect.c
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 1539 (offset 215 lines).
> patching file fs/ext4/inode.c
> patching file fs/ext4/mmp.c
> patching file fs/ext4/namei.c
> patching file fs/ext4/super.c
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 1951 (offset -3 lines).
> patching file fs/ext4/xattr.c
> patching file include/trace/events/ext4.h
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 1956 (offset 8 lines).
> Hunk #2 succeeded at 2060 (offset 8 lines).
> Hunk #3 succeeded at 2079 (offset 8 lines).
> 
> With only Dimitry's patchesm this happens, to -rc4:
> 
> $ cat ~/dev/001-ext4_fix-usless-declarations.diff | patch -p1
> patching file fs/ext4/ialloc.c
> patching file fs/ext4/ioctl.c
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 359 (offset 4 lines).
> patching file fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> patching file fs/ext4/move_extent.c
> 
> $ cat ~/dev/002-ext4_fix-cpu_vs_disk-conversions.diff | patch --dry-run -p1
> patching file fs/ext4/extents.c
> Hunk #4 FAILED at 4639.
> 1 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file fs/ext4/extents.c.rej
> patching file fs/ext4/indirect.c
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 1539 (offset 215 lines).
> patching file fs/ext4/inode.c
> patching file fs/ext4/mmp.c
> patching file fs/ext4/namei.c
> patching file fs/ext4/super.c
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 1951 (offset -3 lines).
> patching file fs/ext4/xattr.c
> patching file include/trace/events/ext4.h
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 1956 (offset 8 lines).
> Hunk #2 succeeded at 2060 (offset 8 lines).
> Hunk #3 succeeded at 2079 (offset 8 lines).

I guess that is because Dmitry's patch is against dev branch of ext4
tree.  Please applied my patch.  I think it could fix the bug.  That
would be great if you could give this patch a try [1].

1. http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/233555/

Thanks,
						- Zheng
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Patch

diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents.c b/fs/ext4/extents.c
index 1530cf4..e8460f6 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/extents.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/extents.c
@@ -3272,7 +3272,7 @@  static int ext4_ext_convert_to_initialized(handle_t *handle,
 		if (err)
 			goto out;
 		zero_ex.ee_block = ex->ee_block;
-		zero_ex.ee_len = ext4_ext_get_actual_len(ex);
+		zero_ex.ee_len = cpu_to_le16(ext4_ext_get_actual_len(ext));
 		ext4_ext_store_pblock(&zero_ex, ext4_ext_pblock(ex));
 
 		err = ext4_ext_get_access(handle, inode, path + depth);