On 2022/3/1 14:30, kernel test robot wrote:
Greeting,
FYI, we noticed the following commit (built with gcc-9):
commit: 3626a285f87dceb4ca649d0ef015d7b295206cdf ("btrfs: introduce dedicated helper to scrub simple-stripe based range")
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master
in testcase: xfstests
version: xfstests-x86_64-1de1db8-1_20220217
with following parameters:
disk: 6HDD
fs: btrfs
test: btrfs-group-07
ucode: 0x28
test-description: xfstests is a regression test suite for xfs and other files ystems.
test-url: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfstests-dev.git
on test machine: 8 threads 1 sockets Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4770 CPU @ 3.40GHz with 8G memory
caused below changes (please refer to attached dmesg/kmsg for entire log/backtrace):
If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag
Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@xxxxxxxxx>
[ 65.408303][ T3224] BTRFS info (device sdb2): flagging fs with big metadata feature
[ 65.415944][ T3224] BTRFS info (device sdb2): disk space caching is enabled
[ 65.422842][ T3224] BTRFS info (device sdb2): has skinny extents
[ 65.436656][ T3224] BTRFS info (device sdb2): checking UUID tree
[ 66.134430][ T3293] BTRFS info (device sdb2): dev_replace from /dev/sdb3 (devid 2) to /dev/sdb6 started
[ 67.823326][ T3293] divide error: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI
[ 67.828668][ T3293] CPU: 3 PID: 3293 Comm: btrfs Not tainted 5.17.0-rc5-00101-g3626a285f87d #1
[ 67.837169][ T3293] Hardware name: Dell Inc. OptiPlex 9020/0DNKMN, BIOS A05 12/05/2013
[ 67.844982][ T3293] RIP: 0010:scrub_stripe (kbuild/src/consumer/fs/btrfs/scrub.c:3448 kbuild/src/consumer/fs/btrfs/scrub.c:3486 kbuild/src/consumer/fs/btrfs/scrub.c:3644) btrfs
[ 67.850976][ T3293] Code: 00 00 fc ff df 48 89 f9 48 c1 e9 03 0f b6 0c 11 48 89 fa 83 e2 07 83 c2 03 38 ca 7c 08 84 c9 0f 85 27 09 00 00 41 8b 5d 1c 99 <f7> fb 48 8b 54 24 30 48 c1 ea 03 48 63 e8 48 b8 00 00 00 00 00 fc
All code
This is weird, the code is from simple_stripe_full_stripe_len(), which
means the chunk map must be RAID0 or RAID10.
In that case, their sub_stripes should be either 1 or 2, why we got 0 there?
In fact, from volumes.c, all sub_stripes is from btrfs_raid_array[],
which all have either 1 or 2 sub_stripes.
Although the code is old, not the latest version, it should still not
cause such problem.
Mind to retest with my branch to see if it can be reproduced?
https://github.com/adam900710/linux/tree/refactor_scrub
Thanks,
Qu
========
0: 00 00 add %al,(%rax)
2: fc cld
3: ff (bad)
4: df 48 89 fisttps -0x77(%rax)
7: f9 stc
8: 48 c1 e9 03 shr $0x3,%rcx
c: 0f b6 0c 11 movzbl (%rcx,%rdx,1),%ecx
10: 48 89 fa mov %rdi,%rdx
13: 83 e2 07 and $0x7,%edx
16: 83 c2 03 add $0x3,%edx
19: 38 ca cmp %cl,%dl
1b: 7c 08 jl 0x25
1d: 84 c9 test %cl,%cl
1f: 0f 85 27 09 00 00 jne 0x94c
25: 41 8b 5d 1c mov 0x1c(%r13),%ebx
29: 99 cltd
2a:* f7 fb idiv %ebx <-- trapping instruction
2c: 48 8b 54 24 30 mov 0x30(%rsp),%rdx
31: 48 c1 ea 03 shr $0x3,%rdx
35: 48 63 e8 movslq %eax,%rbp
38: 48 rex.W
39: b8 00 00 00 00 mov $0x0,%eax
3e: 00 fc add %bh,%ah
Code starting with the faulting instruction
===========================================
0: f7 fb idiv %ebx
2: 48 8b 54 24 30 mov 0x30(%rsp),%rdx
7: 48 c1 ea 03 shr $0x3,%rdx
b: 48 63 e8 movslq %eax,%rbp
e: 48 rex.W
f: b8 00 00 00 00 mov $0x0,%eax
14: 00 fc add %bh,%ah
[ 67.870187][ T3293] RSP: 0018:ffffc9000a71f450 EFLAGS: 00010246
[ 67.876028][ T3293] RAX: 0000000000000004 RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 0000000000000000
[ 67.883756][ T3293] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 0000000000000004 RDI: ffff888129ec6d1c
[ 67.891491][ T3293] RBP: ffff8881453682a0 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: 0000000000000000
[ 67.899230][ T3293] R10: ffff88821534a063 R11: ffffed1042a6940c R12: ffff888121238000
[ 67.906955][ T3293] R13: ffff888129ec6d00 R14: ffff888145368000 R15: 0000000000000008
[ 67.914680][ T3293] FS: 00007f2851eb08c0(0000) GS:ffff8881a6d80000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
[ 67.923351][ T3293] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
[ 67.929709][ T3293] CR2: 00007ffea4ff07f8 CR3: 000000010a0fc005 CR4: 00000000001706e0
[ 67.937437][ T3293] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
[ 67.945163][ T3293] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
[ 67.952891][ T3293] Call Trace:
[ 67.955992][ T3293] <TASK>
[ 67.958749][ T3293] ? kasan_save_stack (kbuild/src/consumer/mm/kasan/common.c:39)
[ 67.963395][ T3293] ? kasan_set_track (kbuild/src/consumer/mm/kasan/common.c:45)
[ 67.967951][ T3293] ? kasan_set_free_info (kbuild/src/consumer/mm/kasan/generic.c:372)
[ 67.972851][ T3293] ? mutex_unlock (kbuild/src/consumer/arch/x86/include/asm/atomic64_64.h:190 kbuild/src/consumer/include/linux/atomic/atomic-long.h:449 kbuild/src/consumer/include/linux/atomic/atomic-instrumented.h:1790 kbuild/src/consumer/kernel/locking/mutex.c:178 kbuild/src/consumer/kernel/locking/mutex.c:537)
To reproduce:
git clone https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests.git
cd lkp-tests
sudo bin/lkp install job.yaml # job file is attached in this email
bin/lkp split-job --compatible job.yaml # generate the yaml file for lkp run
sudo bin/lkp run generated-yaml-file
# if come across any failure that blocks the test,
# please remove ~/.lkp and /lkp dir to run from a clean state.
---
0DAY/LKP+ Test Infrastructure Open Source Technology Center
https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/lkp@xxxxxxxxxxxx Intel Corporation
Thanks,
Oliver Sang
