Bug 1347671

Summary: xfs_db: xfs_db check reports bad magic number and other errors on ppc64/le host
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 Reporter: Eryu Guan <eguan>
Component: xfsprogsAssignee: Eric Sandeen <esandeen>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact: Filesystem QE <fs-qe>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 7.3CC: eguan
Target Milestone: rc   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: ppc64   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-07-21 03:41:26 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Attachments:
Description Flags
xfs-032.full none

Description Eryu Guan 2016-06-17 11:34:45 UTC 
Description of problem:
xfs/032 fails on ppc64/ppc64le host with xfsprogs-4.5.0-2.el7, "xfs_db -c check" after test reports bad magic number and other errors like below:

...
bad magic number 0 for inode 3147775
root inode 1792 is not a directory
block 0/7 type unknown not expected
...
allocated inode 1792 has 0 link count

A simpler reproducer would be:
# on ppc64 or ppc64le host
mkfs -t xfs -s size=32768 -b size=65536 -d size=1g -f /dev/sda5
xfs_db -c check /dev/sda5

Both v4 and v5 xfs could reproduce.

xfsprogs-3.2.2-2.el7 works fine, xfs_db check reports no error.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
xfsprogs-4.5.0-2.el6.ppc64
kernel-3.10.0-439.el7

How reproducible:
100%

Steps to Reproduce:
1. see description
2.
3.

Actual results:
xfs_db -c check reports errors

Expected results:
no error

Additional info:
Upstream kernel and xfsprogs have the same issue. I first noticed this with xfsprogs-4.5.0-rc1. And I've reported this (along with other issues) to xfs list, but no response.

http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2016-03/msg00063.html

Now a bug is needed to track the failure for RHEL7.
Comment 1 Eryu Guan 2016-06-17 11:35:46 UTC 
Created attachment 1169051 [details]
xfs-032.full
Comment 2 Eric Sandeen 2016-06-17 15:15:09 UTC 
This is probably a dup of bug #1346927

Thanks for the report, we'll revert the problematic patch.
Comment 3 Eric Sandeen 2016-07-20 17:38:33 UTC 
Can you see if this bug persists with xfsprogs-4.5.0-4.el7 or later?  Hopefully it is just a dup of #1346927

Thanks,
-Eric
Comment 4 Eryu Guan 2016-07-21 03:41:26 UTC 
Confirmed xfsprogs-4.5.0-5.el7 passed xfs/032, looks like it's indeed a dup of bug 1346927. I'm closing it as so. Thanks Eric!

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1346927 ***