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 56DADC433F5 for ; Sun, 9 Oct 2022 23:43:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231506AbiJIXnF (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Oct 2022 19:43:05 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42762 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231656AbiJIXm2 (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Oct 2022 19:42:28 -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 E927057E34 for ; Sun, 9 Oct 2022 16:14:13 -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 E47B0B80DD0 for ; Sun, 9 Oct 2022 22:47:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9558EC43142 for ; Sun, 9 Oct 2022 22:47:46 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1665355666; bh=TA8WZxaIMD9zOwIi6zlIBUe8wFI/Y9QFrjIaDLiH23k=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=ZwHKSlLcBhww4L8fGKd60uJ6yzh4g5LSia+yyIsK/vjdU4gEx/0ZQl5h1XeS91xKY RaYHvWTpXc0uNvOu0csQYdZIwutimtrw1qxgl6nTcy4E/2m0biEkqP7g5Q5zg2jFMQ fNxOfzIACZZDhJtTirgNf/ZoU9Uw8Z9JshPdZvcEYqXhJeyOqrUYp0xcb+Zu+MNsEA raVf1Xa1rKkcseFrBf9tglxfWkthWCzg2zdo0w2Xhyk/85dQdbXIqPmRXpiSPmuc+j I0ip6A0S9ERZuaWHU/k1FRuRLPcC3TcztqwEaHe4fZ8m6Hr2C4sIIHg0abZQ/XeO7E oqluWFdIV4EcQ== Received: by aws-us-west-2-korg-bugzilla-1.web.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 857CBC433E9; Sun, 9 Oct 2022 22:47:46 +0000 (UTC) From: bugzilla-daemon@kernel.org To: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: [Bug 216566] [xfstests generic/648] BUG: unable to handle page fault, RIP: 0010:__xfs_dir3_data_check+0x171/0x700 [xfs] Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2022 22:47:46 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: AssignedTo filesystem_xfs@kernel-bugs.kernel.org X-Bugzilla-Product: File System X-Bugzilla-Component: XFS X-Bugzilla-Version: 2.5 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: david@fromorbit.com X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: filesystem_xfs@kernel-bugs.kernel.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-xfs@vger.kernel.org https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D216566 --- Comment #1 from Dave Chinner (david@fromorbit.com) --- On Sun, Oct 09, 2022 at 05:47:49PM +0000, bugzilla-daemon@kernel.org wrote: > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D216566 >=20 > Bug ID: 216566 > Summary: [xfstests generic/648] BUG: unable to handle page > fault, RIP: 0010:__xfs_dir3_data_check+0x171/0x700 > [xfs] > Product: File System > Version: 2.5 > Kernel Version: v6.1-rc0 > Hardware: All > OS: Linux > Tree: Mainline > Status: NEW > Severity: normal > Priority: P1 > Component: XFS > Assignee: filesystem_xfs@kernel-bugs.kernel.org > Reporter: zlang@redhat.com > Regression: No >=20 > xfstests generic/648 hit kernel panic[1] on xfs with 64k directory block = size > (-n size=3D65536), before panic, there's a kernel assertion (not sure if = it's > related). >=20 > It's reproducable, but not easy. Generally I reproduced it by loop running > generic/648 on xfs (-n size=3D65536) hundreds of time. >=20 > The last time I hit this panic on linux with HEAD=3D Given that there have been no changes to XFS committed in v6.1-rc0 at this point in time, this won't be an XFS regression unless you can reproduce it on 6.0 or 5.19 kernels, too. Regardless, I'd suggest bisection is in order to find where the problem was introduced. -Dave. --=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.=