On Fri, Apr 18, 2025 at 07:51:58AM +0000, Shinichiro Kawasaki wrote: > On Apr 15, 2025 / 22:14, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 10:01:44PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > It's the same patch as: > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20250408175125.GL6266@frogsfrogsfrogs/ > > > > > > which is to say, xfs/032 with while true; do blkid; done running in the > > > background to increase the chances of a collision. > > > > I think the xfs-zoned CI actually hit this with 032 without any extra > > action the. > > I observed xfs/032 hanged using the kernel on linux-xfs/for-next branch with git > hash 71700ac47ad8. Before the hang, kernel reported the messages below: > > Oops: general protection fault, probably for non-canonical address 0xdffffc0000000001: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN NOPTI > KASAN: null-ptr-deref in range [0x0000000000000008-0x000000000000000f] > CPU: 21 UID: 0 PID: 3187783 Comm: (udev-worker) Not tainted 6.15.0-rc1-kts-xfs-g71700ac47ad+ #1 PREEMPT(lazy) > Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.16.3-3.fc41 04/01/2014 > RIP: 0010:guard_bio_eod+0x52/0x5b0 > > The failure was recreated in stable manner. I applied this patch series, and > confirmed the failure disappears. Good. (I needed to resolve conflicts, though) > > This patch fixes block layer. So, IMO, it's the better to have a test case in > blktests to confirm the fix. I created a blktests test case which recreates the > failure using blockdev and fio commands. Will post it soon. Ok. I'll post a non-rfcrap version of the series shortly. Thank you for writing a regression test! :) --D
