On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 10:51:18AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, 19 Oct 2023 at 10:26, Linus Torvalds > <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > That said, the quota dependency is quite odd, since normally I > > wouldn't expect the quota code to really even trigger much during > > boot. When it triggers that consistently, and that early during boot, > > I would expect others to have reported more of this. > > > > Strange. > > Hmm. I do think the quota list handling has some odd things going on. > And it did change with the whole ->dq_free thing. > > Some of it is just bad: > > #ifdef CONFIG_QUOTA_DEBUG > /* sanity check */ > BUG_ON(!list_empty(&dquot->dq_free)); > #endif > > is done under a spinlock, and if it ever triggers, the machine is > dead. Dammit, I *hate* how people use BUG_ON() for assertions. It's a > disgrace. That should be a WARN_ON_ONCE(). In my configuration CONFIG_QUOTA=y CONFIG_QUOTA_NETLINK_INTERFACE=y # CONFIG_QUOTA_DEBUG is not set CONFIG_QUOTA_TREE=y # CONFIG_QFMT_V1 is not set CONFIG_QFMT_V2=y CONFIG_QUOTACTL=y > And it does have quite a bit of list-related changes, with the whole > series from Baokun Li changing how the ->dq_free list works. > > The fact that it consistently bisects to the merge is still odd. Exactly! Imre suggested to test the merge point itself, so far I tested the result of the merge in the upstream, but not the branch/tag that has been merged. Let's see if I have time this week for that. This hunting is a bit exhaustive. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
