reiserfs + acl corruption
in [Kernel]
|
Prev: [PATCH 05/15] x86 acpi/irq: Generalize mp_config_acpi_legacy_irqs
Next: [PATCH 06/15] x86 ioapic: Only export mp_find_ioapic and mp_find_ioapic_pin in io_apic.h
From: Marco Gatti on 30 Mar 2010 04:10 I hope to post in the right place. I recently suffered a filesystem corruption with reiserfs in a production environment and I was able to reproduce it. The corruption started when i played with extended attributes, posix acls, with a partition containing hundreds of thousands of files. To reproduce the issue test it this way (using bash) in a separate disk, partition or virtual disk using loopback: mkfsreiserfs /dev/sdc1 mount -o acl /dev/sdc1 /mnt cd /mnt mkdir dir_with_many_files touch dir_with_many_files/{1..100000} setfacl -R -m u:username:rw dir_with_many_files setfacl -R -x u:username dir_with_many_files (slow responsiveness of system during the execution of this command) setfacl -R -b dir_with_many_files With a debian lenny standard kernel 2.6.26 (port amd64) these commands ends succesfully and no corruption occours. With a recent kernel, versions 2.6.32.8 - 2.6.32.9 - 2.6.32.10, (x86_64) compiled in different ways, from standard configuration to optimized versions even with no support for modules i get thousands of this kind of message: REISERFS warning (device sdc1): jdm-20002 reiserfs_xattr_get: Invalid hash for xattr (system.posix_acl_access) associated with [2 848 0x0 SD] then wierd things start to happen and the more you use this filesystem the more you disrupt it: this leads to a corrupted filesystem! If you try with less files, let's say 50000, no corruption or error occour to me. The number of files to reproduce this behaviour could be different and it seems to be related to the machine you use: 100000 are enought for a virtual machine with 1GB of RAM, but i needed 300000 of files using a real machine with 4GB of RAM. I tested other filesystem but i get no corruption at all with ext2, ext3, ext4 and xfs. I use debian stable or testing environments and i'm using reiserfs included in vanilla kernels, with default options. Am I doing something wrong? Can someone test and reproduce this behaviour? Regards Marco Gatti -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ |