Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Tue, 28 Oct 2003 14:13:29 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: 2.6.0test9 Reiserfs boot time "buffer layer error at fs/buffer.c:431" |
| |
lkml-031028@amos.mailshell.com wrote: > > [1.] One line summary of the problem: > > First time boot of 2.6.0test9 on a resierfs disk gives the error above. > (buffer layer error at fs/buffer.c:431) > > ... > > block=16, b_blocknr=64 > b_state=0x00000019, b_size=1024 > buffer layer error at fs/buffer.c:431
ah-hah.
> Call Trace: > [<c014f2b5>] __find_get_block_slow+0x85/0x120 > [<c01070c9>] kernel_thread_helper+0x5/0xc > [<c010970c>] dump_stack+0x1c/0x20 > [<c0150283>] __find_get_block+0x83/0xe0 > [<c014fec3>] __getblk_slow+0x23/0xf0 > [<c015032f>] __getblk+0x4f/0x60 > [<c01503bf>] __bread+0x1f/0x40 > [<c01a2132>] read_super_block+0x82/0x210 > [<c01a2d95>] reiserfs_fill_super+0x555/0x5a0 > [<c01d69b7>] snprintf+0x27/0x30 > [<c017bce2>] disk_name+0x62/0xb0 > [<c0154bc5>] sb_set_blocksize+0x25/0x60 > [<c0154594>] get_sb_bdev+0x124/0x160 > [<c01a2e4f>] get_super_block+0x2f/0x60 > [<c01a2840>] reiserfs_fill_super+0x0/0x5a0 > [<c01547ff>] do_kern_mount+0x5f/0xe0 > [<c01695c8>] do_add_mount+0x78/0x150 > [<c01698b4>] do_mount+0x124/0x170 > [<c0169720>] copy_mount_options+0x80/0xf0 > [<c0169c6f>] sys_mount+0xbf/0x140 > [<c0462b9f>] do_mount_root+0x2f/0xa0 > [<c0462c64>] mount_block_root+0x54/0x120 > [<c0462d8e>] mount_root+0x5e/0x70 > [<c0462dbd>] prepare_namespace+0x1d/0xe0 > [<c01050d2>] init+0x32/0x160 > [<c01050a0>] init+0x0/0x160 > [<c01070c9>] kernel_thread_helper+0x5/0xc
I've been waiting a year for someone who can reproduce this.
The filesystem is trying to read the 4k block at offset 16*4k.
But someone had previously read the 1k block at offset 64*1k. It is an alias of the 4k read.
We _should_ have shot down the four 1k-sized buffer_heads which are attached to the offset=16 pagecache page before trying to read it with 4k blocksize.
But for some reason, that page still has the 1k-sized buffer_heads.
This means that somehow, somewhere, we failed to successfully run set_blocksize() against that disk.
Are you using initrd?
Could you please add this patch, and send the new dmesg output?
25-akpm/fs/block_dev.c | 15 ++++++++++++--- 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff -puN fs/block_dev.c~a fs/block_dev.c --- 25/fs/block_dev.c~a Tue Oct 28 14:11:20 2003 +++ 25-akpm/fs/block_dev.c Tue Oct 28 14:11:24 2003 @@ -50,17 +50,26 @@ int set_blocksize(struct block_device *b { int oldsize; + printk("%s: size=%d\n", __FUNCTION__, size); + /* Size must be a power of two, and between 512 and PAGE_SIZE */ - if (size > PAGE_SIZE || size < 512 || (size & (size-1))) + if (size > PAGE_SIZE || size < 512 || (size & (size-1))) { + printk("%s: EINVAL 1\n", __FUNCTION__); return -EINVAL; + } /* Size cannot be smaller than the size supported by the device */ - if (size < bdev_hardsect_size(bdev)) + if (size < bdev_hardsect_size(bdev)) { + printk("%s: %d < %d\n", __FUNCTION__, size, + bdev_hardsect_size(bdev)); return -EINVAL; + } oldsize = bdev->bd_block_size; - if (oldsize == size) + if (oldsize == size) { + printk("%s: %d OK\n", __FUNCTION__, size); return 0; + } /* Ok, we're actually changing the blocksize.. */ sync_blockdev(bdev); _
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |