similar to: report BUG: io_uring triggers umount error

I can reproduce this in my local VM. I've traced ocfs2_dismount_volume and found that it hasn't been called. So EBUSY is returned in VFS layer. I guess something wrong when doing a copy with linked SQEs (normal copy seems no problem). Thanks, Joseph On 2/24/23 8:32 AM, Heming Zhao wrote: > Hello List, > > I found a weird bug on ocfs2. I am busying with other jobs, if anyone

On 2/24/23 2:54 PM, Joseph Qi wrote: > I can reproduce this in my local VM. > I've traced ocfs2_dismount_volume and found that it hasn't been called. > So EBUSY is returned in VFS layer. I guess something wrong when doing > a copy with linked SQEs (normal copy seems no problem). > I am inclined to agree with you. I also test liburing examples apps on ext4 partition,

On 2/24/23 3:48 PM, Heming Zhao via Ocfs2-devel wrote: > On 2/24/23 2:54 PM, Joseph Qi wrote: >> I can reproduce this in my local VM. >> I've traced ocfs2_dismount_volume and found that it hasn't been called. >> So EBUSY is returned in VFS layer. I guess something wrong when doing >> a copy with linked SQEs (normal copy seems no problem). >> > > I am

On 2/24/23 3:52 PM, Joseph Qi wrote: > > > On 2/24/23 3:48 PM, Heming Zhao via Ocfs2-devel wrote: >> On 2/24/23 2:54 PM, Joseph Qi wrote: >>> I can reproduce this in my local VM. >>> I've traced ocfs2_dismount_volume and found that it hasn't been called. >>> So EBUSY is returned in VFS layer. I guess something wrong when doing >>> a copy

On 2/24/23 4:03 PM, Heming Zhao wrote: > On 2/24/23 3:52 PM, Joseph Qi wrote: >> >> >> On 2/24/23 3:48 PM, Heming Zhao via Ocfs2-devel wrote: >>> On 2/24/23 2:54 PM, Joseph Qi wrote: >>>> I can reproduce this in my local VM. >>>> I've traced ocfs2_dismount_volume and found that it hasn't been called. >>>> So EBUSY is

On 2/26/23 11:22 PM, Heming Zhao wrote: > On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 04:45:44PM +0800, Heming Zhao via Ocfs2-devel wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 24, 2023 at 06:59:47PM +0800, Joseph Qi wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 2/24/23 4:03 PM, Heming Zhao wrote: >>>> On 2/24/23 3:52 PM, Joseph Qi wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 2/24/23 3:48

On Fri, Feb 24, 2023 at 06:59:47PM +0800, Joseph Qi wrote: > > > On 2/24/23 4:03 PM, Heming Zhao wrote: > > On 2/24/23 3:52 PM, Joseph Qi wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 2/24/23 3:48 PM, Heming Zhao via Ocfs2-devel wrote: > >>> On 2/24/23 2:54 PM, Joseph Qi wrote: > >>>> I can reproduce this in my local VM. > >>>>

On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 04:45:44PM +0800, Heming Zhao via Ocfs2-devel wrote: > On Fri, Feb 24, 2023 at 06:59:47PM +0800, Joseph Qi wrote: > > > > > > On 2/24/23 4:03 PM, Heming Zhao wrote: > > > On 2/24/23 3:52 PM, Joseph Qi wrote: > > >> > > >> > > >> On 2/24/23 3:48 PM, Heming Zhao via Ocfs2-devel wrote: > > >>> On

Hi, On 2/27/23 10:59 AM, Joseph Qi via Ocfs2-devel wrote: > > > On 2/26/23 11:22 PM, Heming Zhao wrote: >> On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 04:45:44PM +0800, Heming Zhao via Ocfs2-devel wrote: >>> On Fri, Feb 24, 2023 at 06:59:47PM +0800, Joseph Qi wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 2/24/23 4:03 PM, Heming Zhao wrote: >>>>> On 2/24/23 3:52

Sorry for reply late, I am a little bit busy recently. On Fri, May 05, 2023 at 11:42:51AM +0800, Joseph Qi wrote: > > > On 5/5/23 12:20 AM, Heming Zhao wrote: > > On Thu, May 04, 2023 at 05:41:29PM +0800, Joseph Qi wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 5/4/23 4:02 PM, Heming Zhao wrote: > >>> On Thu, May 04, 2023 at 03:34:49PM +0800, Joseph Qi wrote:

On 5/9/23 12:40 AM, Heming Zhao wrote: > Sorry for reply late, I am a little bit busy recently. > > On Fri, May 05, 2023 at 11:42:51AM +0800, Joseph Qi wrote: >> >> >> On 5/5/23 12:20 AM, Heming Zhao wrote: >>> On Thu, May 04, 2023 at 05:41:29PM +0800, Joseph Qi wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 5/4/23 4:02 PM, Heming Zhao wrote:

On 5/5/23 12:20 AM, Heming Zhao wrote: > On Thu, May 04, 2023 at 05:41:29PM +0800, Joseph Qi wrote: >> >> >> On 5/4/23 4:02 PM, Heming Zhao wrote: >>> On Thu, May 04, 2023 at 03:34:49PM +0800, Joseph Qi wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 5/4/23 2:21 PM, Heming Zhao wrote: >>>>> On Thu, May 04, 2023 at 10:27:46AM +0800, Joseph

On Thu, May 04, 2023 at 05:41:29PM +0800, Joseph Qi wrote: > > > On 5/4/23 4:02 PM, Heming Zhao wrote: > > On Thu, May 04, 2023 at 03:34:49PM +0800, Joseph Qi wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 5/4/23 2:21 PM, Heming Zhao wrote: > >>> On Thu, May 04, 2023 at 10:27:46AM +0800, Joseph Qi wrote: > >>>> > >>>> >

fstest generic cases 347 361 628 629 trigger a same issue: When jbd2 enter ABORT status, ocfs2 ignores it and keep going to commit journal. This commit gives ocfs2 ability to handle jbd2 ABORT case. Signed-off-by: Heming Zhao <heming.zhao at suse.com> --- fs/ocfs2/alloc.c | 10 ++++++---- fs/ocfs2/journal.c | 5 +++++ fs/ocfs2/localalloc.c | 3 +++ 3 files changed, 14

Sorry, please pause this patch review. When I was investigating fstest generic failed case 347 361, I found the wake_up() action should move out the 'if()' area. The correct way is calling wake_up() unconditionally. Thanks, Heming On 4/21/23 4:36 PM, Heming Zhao wrote: > fstest generic case 266 272 281 trigger hanging issue when umount. > > I use 266 to describe the root cause.

On 2020-04-29 00:40, Jeremy Allison via samba wrote: > On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 11:21:35PM +0200, A L wrote: >> I set up the following test case: >> * Linux 5.7-rc3 (with the patch from previous mail) >> * samba-4.12.1 >> * gcc-9.3.0 >> * liburing-0.6 >> * glibc-2.30-r8 >> >> ================================= >> Test 1) >> Copy 10 10GB

On 2020-04-27 18:45, Jeremy Allison via samba wrote: > On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 10:27:17AM +0200, A L via samba wrote: >> On 2020-04-26 19:46, Jeremy Allison via samba wrote: >>> On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 11:51:42AM +0200, A L via samba wrote: >>>> * Connected from a Windows 10 computer over 1G ethernet. * Copy >>>> data using Windows Explorer and

fstest generic case 266 272 281 trigger hanging issue when umount. I use 266 to describe the root cause. ``` 49 _dmerror_unmount 50 _dmerror_mount 51 52 echo "Compare files" 53 md5sum $testdir/file1 | _filter_scratch 54 md5sum $testdir/file2 | _filter_scratch 55 56 echo "CoW and unmount" 57 sync 58 _dmerror_load_error_table 59 urk=$($XFS_IO_PROG -f -c "pwrite

On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 11:21:35PM +0200, A L wrote: > > I set up the following test case: > * Linux 5.7-rc3 (with the patch from previous mail) > * samba-4.12.1 > * gcc-9.3.0 > * liburing-0.6 > * glibc-2.30-r8 > > ================================= > Test 1) > Copy 10 10GB files. > 1) ddrescue -s 10G -v -f /dev/urandom 0.bin > 2) for((i=1;i<=10;i+=1));

On 2020-04-30 09:08, A L via samba wrote: > > On 2020-04-29 00:40, Jeremy Allison via samba wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 11:21:35PM +0200, A L wrote: >>> I set up the following test case: >>> * Linux 5.7-rc3 (with the patch from previous mail) >>> * samba-4.12.1 >>> * gcc-9.3.0 >>> * liburing-0.6 >>> * glibc-2.30-r8