On Sat, Sep 12, 2020 at 06:30:15PM +0530, Chandan Babu R wrote: > The following sequence of commands, > > mkfs.xfs -f -m reflink=0 -r rtdev=/dev/loop1,size=10M /dev/loop0 > mount -o rtdev=/dev/loop1 /dev/loop0 /mnt > xfs_growfs /mnt > > ... causes the following call trace to be printed on the console, > > XFS: Assertion failed: (bip->bli_flags & XFS_BLI_STALE) || (xfs_blft_from_flags(&bip->__bli_format) > XFS_BLFT_UNKNOWN_BUF && xfs_blft_from_flags(&bip->__bli_format) < XFS_BLFT_MAX_BUF), file: fs/xfs/xfs_buf_item.c, line: 331 > Call Trace: > xfs_buf_item_format+0x632/0x680 > ? kmem_alloc_large+0x29/0x90 > ? kmem_alloc+0x70/0x120 > ? xfs_log_commit_cil+0x132/0x940 > xfs_log_commit_cil+0x26f/0x940 > ? xfs_buf_item_init+0x1ad/0x240 > ? xfs_growfs_rt_alloc+0x1fc/0x280 > __xfs_trans_commit+0xac/0x370 > xfs_growfs_rt_alloc+0x1fc/0x280 > xfs_growfs_rt+0x1a0/0x5e0 > xfs_file_ioctl+0x3fd/0xc70 > ? selinux_file_ioctl+0x174/0x220 > ksys_ioctl+0x87/0xc0 > __x64_sys_ioctl+0x16/0x20 > do_syscall_64+0x3e/0x70 > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 > > This occurs because the buffer being formatted has the value of > XFS_BLFT_UNKNOWN_BUF assigned to the 'type' subfield of > bip->bli_formats->blf_flags. > > This commit fixes the issue by assigning one of XFS_BLFT_RTSUMMARY_BUF > and XFS_BLFT_RTBITMAP_BUF to the 'type' subfield of > bip->bli_formats->blf_flags before committing the corresponding > transaction. > > Signed-off-by: Chandan Babu R <chandanrlinux@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > fs/xfs/xfs_rtalloc.c | 6 ++++++ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_rtalloc.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_rtalloc.c > index 6209e7b6b895..192a69f307d7 100644 > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_rtalloc.c > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_rtalloc.c > @@ -767,8 +767,12 @@ xfs_growfs_rt_alloc( > struct xfs_bmbt_irec map; /* block map output */ > int nmap; /* number of block maps */ > int resblks; /* space reservation */ > + enum xfs_blft buf_type; > struct xfs_trans *tp; > > + buf_type = (ip == mp->m_rsumip) ? > + XFS_BLFT_RTSUMMARY_BUF : XFS_BLFT_RTBITMAP_BUF; Nit: can you turn this into a normal if / else? Otherwise looks good: Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
