From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2F14C433FE for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2022 17:01:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229879AbiJJRBy (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Oct 2022 13:01:54 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:53056 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229887AbiJJRBq (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Oct 2022 13:01:46 -0400 Received: from ams.source.kernel.org (ams.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:4601:e00::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B0AC2CDFA for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2022 10:01:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ams.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5BF01B8104D for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2022 17:01:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1709BC433D6 for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2022 17:01:42 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1665421302; bh=dyy2+ignRinmrhjNXBzLrDm0o+s6swP9C5mzx6OI7pE=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=pxYr6FdYq32j2xp8P1CqY8QV2VTHYb6PC3N4xBnYJY/L96eP/25fxdZsXUNZz1wuJ ghs4ROAQHUWxXpYmVxfC64L9rdRI+cSaAt0yveWz6d+Ke0GFysSNqOCpeS4xJZMvKx sugjCy1diHwehQN1xvfCRj/HCvZJ9FnEW/wWfHuwYKEGciDADy8CzS3/D5M1hvbGMH 0uMKrqcphDP3KPWgeXXrG0SKRKbl3AHyTuvGceZG02LaBzpQ8+7IgBDcEumxPj2cRr fvdlIYfIcuFfYFXnNWUiW+DAOPA2KzBGeT4mmHHLTJelRbFvf9TYrByKscc1KB50NA zsTdjtG5PDR7g== Received: by aws-us-west-2-korg-bugzilla-1.web.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id F2CD0C433E9; Mon, 10 Oct 2022 17:01:41 +0000 (UTC) From: bugzilla-daemon@kernel.org To: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org Subject: [Bug 216529] [fstests generic/048] BUG: Kernel NULL pointer dereference at 0x00000069, filemap_release_folio+0x88/0xb0 Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2022 17:01:41 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: AssignedTo fs_ext4@kernel-bugs.osdl.org X-Bugzilla-Product: File System X-Bugzilla-Component: ext4 X-Bugzilla-Version: 2.5 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: ritesh.list@gmail.com X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: fs_ext4@kernel-bugs.osdl.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D216529 --- Comment #5 from ritesh.list@gmail.com --- On 22/09/27 11:40PM, Ritesh Harjani (IBM) wrote: > On 22/09/26 01:02AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 25, 2022 at 11:55:29AM +0000, bugzilla-daemon@kernel.org wr= ote: > > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D216529 > > > > > > > > > Hit a panic on ppc64le, by running generic/048 with 1k block size: > > > > Hmm, does this reproduce reliably for you? I test with a 1k block > > size on x86_64 as a proxy 4k block sizes on PPC64, where the blocksize > > < pagesize... and this isn't reproducing for me on x86, and I don't > > have access to a PPC64LE system. > > > > Ritesh, is this something you can take a look at it? Thanks! > > I was away for some personal work for last few days, but I am back to work > from > today. Sure, I will take a look at this and will get back. > > I did give this test a couple of runs though, but wasn't able to reproduce > it. > But let me try few more things along with more iterations. Will update > accordingly. I thought I had updated this. But I guess I forgot to update on this mail thread... I tested this for quite some time in a loop and also gave it a overnight ru= n, but I couldn't hit this issue. I had kept low memory size guest, so that we could see more reclaim activity (which I also ensured by doing perf trace to see if we are going over that path or not while test was running). I am not sure whether this could be a timing issue or what. Maybe if you co= uld share your defconfig, I could give a try with that on my setup once. -ritesh --=20 You may reply to this email to add a comment. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching the assignee of the bug.=