On Sat, Jan 09, 2016 at 01:17:13PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> >
> > I've not seen the inode eviction asserts anymore, but I now hit a
> > corruption warnings in generic/168 reliably. I did hit before as
> > well, but not very reliably.
>
> I'll see if I can repro the 168 error; it's been running in a loop all
> night and hasn't bombed yet.
Note that this is over nfs to a local server, not running on xfs directly,
which is doing fine.
> In the meantime, I added some more tests and fixed a CoW corruption when an
> xfs_io_overwrite extent has cow reservations in the middle of the extent.
>
> I also restarted testing on arm64, ppc64{,el}, and i686; it seems
> stable enough right now to pass all ~130 reflink xfstests here.
I see pretty reliable failures in xfs/128 xfs/132 xfs/139, apparenly
due to content mismatches.
Re the verifier failure:
sees like we're hitting the
if (level >= pag->pagf_refcount_level)
return false;
case. Together with the other garbage in it seems like we're
seeing a btree block that's not properly initialized in some way,
maybe after a split.
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
