[lkml]   [2016]   [Oct]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Regression in next with ext4 oops

* Al Viro <> [161004 08:00]:
> On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 10:02:31AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 11:00:41AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > Never seen this but I suspect it is a fallout from Al's directory locking
> > > changes. In particular ext4_htree_fill_tree() builds rb-tree of found
> > > directory entries in file->private_data (and generally modifies the
> > > structure stored there) but after Al's changes we don't have exclusive
> > > access to struct file if I'm right so if two processes end up calling
> > > getdents() for the same 'struct file' we are doomed.
> >
> > I haven't seen it either, and I've been doing a lot of testing on the
> > ext4 test branch. So I'm guessing Tony has the only reliable repro
> > for the problem at the moment. That being said, it shouldn't be that
> > hard to create a test case for this and add it to xfstests.
> >
> > I'm pretty sure Jan is right about this, though, but it would be great
> > to a get a quick confirmation from Tony if at all possible.
> Jan is wrong - we do have per-struct-file serialization for getdents()
> It might be a race between getdents() on *different* struct
> file for the same directory, but ->private_data is not a problem.

OK found the guilty person after git bisect and that's me.

Git bisect points to commit d776fc86b82f ("wlcore: sdio: Populate config
firmware data"), so adding Kalle to Cc.

Looks like update-initramfs does rmmod of wlcore_sdio and that triggers
some issue with the wlcore driver or with SDIO/MMC. Or maybe it's a memory
corruption issue. I don't know yet exactly what's going on here yet but
I plan to find out after some lunch.



 \ /
  Last update: 2016-10-04 21:17    [W:0.994 / U:1.484 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site