Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 15 Jul 2011 11:21:36 -0500 | From | Seth Forshee <> | Subject | Re: Problems with hfsplus on ipods in 2.6.38+ |
| |
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 11:43:47AM -0400, Daniel Barkalow wrote: > On Fri, 15 Jul 2011, Seth Forshee wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 09:26:11PM -0400, Daniel Barkalow wrote: > > > Okay, I've applied that patch set, and it worked for me without any issues > > > thus far. If you're interested in the debugging output from a device that > > > doesn't work with vanilla but doesn't oops or panic with that patch set, > > > it's attached. I'm using 32-bit x86, if that helps for tracking down > > > differences. > > > > Hrm, looks like I used %lu for sector_t instead of %llu, and that's > > messing up the output on 32-bit builds. What I am able to see looks > > correct though. I put up a new version of the patches with the output > > fixed along with a new build on the bug. > > > > I've had some success producing problems using scsi_debug with a 64-bit > > build, specifically with 1K or 2K sectors. Actually a lot of odd things > > happen with those sector sizes, and they happen whether using my patch > > or reverting the two patches that change hfsplus to using bio, so those > > problems seem unrelated. What I see is that the free/used space numbers > > reported by df don't make sense given the actual files I've copied to > > the volume. If I "fill" the volume (in quotes because really I haven't > > copied in enough data to fill the volume, but it says it's full anyway) > > df reports complete garbage. Then if I proceed to remove all files from > > the volume df still reports that 50% of the space is used. These > > problems aren't present with 512 byte or 4K sectors. > > > > What I also see are GPFs in memory allocation code, which is what I > > believe others have seen with my patch, and so far I haven't seen those > > with the reversions. So I'm suspecting memory corruption, but I don't > > yet see where the corruption is coming form. I found one problem, but I > > don't suspect it's responsible for the GPFs. > > A while later, somewhat after I'd unmounted the filesystem (and sent the > email), I got some memory allocation oopses, also, followed eventually by > some sort of hang (userspace not working but alt-sysrq did work). So I > agree with the memory corruption idea. Do you want corrected debugging > output, or any other information from my actual device, or are you set > with scsi_debug for now?
I think I'm okay with scsi_debug. What would be most helpful now is a deterministic way to reproduce the oopses.
| |