On Jan 20, 2017, at 12:14 PM, Damien Guibouret <damien.guibouret@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Theodore Ts'o wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 03:21:28AM -0500, George Spelvin wrote: >>> I was trying to rmdir an empty directory in lost+found that accumulated >>> during my recent problems. >>> >>> EXT4-fs (md3): mounted filesystem with writeback data mode. Opts: data=writeback,delalloc >>> >>> $ cd /mountpoint/lost+found >>> $ rmdir \#1625089/ >>> >>> ------------[ cut here ]------------ >>> kernel BUG at fs/ext4/inline.c:1943! >>> debugfs: stat <1625089> >>> Inode: 1625089 Type: directory Mode: 0775 Flags: 0x10000000 >>> Generation: 927350643 Version: 0x00000000:00000004 >>> User: 1000 Group: 161 Project: 0 Size: 132 >>> File ACL: 1664090185 Directory ACL: 0 >>> Links: 0 Blockcount: 8 >>> Fragment: Address: 0 Number: 0 Size: 0 >>> ctime: 0x587f2034:472c74ec -- Wed Jan 18 02:58:44 2017 >>> atime: 0x56b9e2f8:b68a7658 -- Tue Feb 9 08:00:40 2016 >>> mtime: 0x56c1bc4b:a7765de8 -- Mon Feb 15 06:53:47 2016 >>> crtime: 0x56ba9eb4:a51d90ac -- Tue Feb 9 21:21:40 2016 >>> Size of extra inode fields: 32 >>> Extended attributes: >>> system.data (72) >>> Inode checksum: 0xe2f12fc5 >>> Size of inline data: 132 >> OK, so the problem seems the inode in question has the INLINE_DATA >> flag set, but i_blocks is non-zero. And it looks like the data was >> actually stored in an exernal data block, and the in-line xattr wasn't >> present. >> e2fsck should be checking and complaining if this is the case. If >> not, it's a bug in e2fsck. >> And the kernel certainy shouldn't be BUG'ing when it comes across >> what is clearly a case of file system corruption. >> Cheers, >> - Ted >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in >> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Hello, > > Perhaps I am wrong, but as the inode has a file ACL, the blockcount should be > different from 0? So it seems valid on this point. Or is there something that > prevent inlined file to have ACL? The "File ACL" label is misleading. ACLs are stored as xattrs, (along with other xattrs like SELinux labels), and also inline data. However, unless the ACL is very large it would also be stored inside the inode itself. If there isn't space inside the inode to store both the inline data and other xattrs, the inline data should be bumped to an external block first (i.e. stored as a regular file), since there is no benefit to doing the reverse. Cheers, Andreas
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
