Bug 744459 - WARNING: at fs/buffer.c:1151 mark_buffer_dirty+0x30/0x88()
Summary: WARNING: at fs/buffer.c:1151 mark_buffer_dirty+0x30/0x88()
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: kernel
Version: 15
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Kernel Maintainer List
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2011-10-08 19:08 UTC by Michael
Modified: 2012-02-02 01:01 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2012-02-02 01:01:19 UTC
Type: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)
The backtrace as collected by ABRT (2.52 KB, text/plain)
2011-10-08 19:08 UTC, Michael
no flags Details

Description Michael 2011-10-08 19:08:10 UTC
Created attachment 527043 [details]
The backtrace as collected by ABRT

Description of problem:

I got this kernel crash and ABRT picked it up. I'm reporting it manually because on F14 the ABRT tries to send to "kerneloops" which apparently is dead.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Fedora 14


Steps to Reproduce:
1. My external SATA enclosure gets accidentally powered off
2. I powered the enclosure back on
3. I remount the ext3 partition (umount /mnt/mountpoint && mount -a)
4. Partition becomes available, all is well
5. 10-15 seconds later ABRT pops up with kernel crash info


How reproducible:
Not sure, I don't want to break my file system by power cycling it unnecessarily


Additional info:
The accidental power off is obviously not the kernel's fault. However it should not crash; it should handle the disappearance of a device gracefully.

Comment 1 Michael 2011-10-08 19:09:05 UTC
Also here is the kernel version I was running when it happened:

$ uname -a
Linux magrathea 2.6.35.14-96.fc14.x86_64 #1 SMP Thu Sep 1 11:59:56 UTC 2011 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

Comment 2 Dave Jones 2011-10-11 14:18:00 UTC
There has been an enormous amount of change to the block layer, and upper layers that handle device removal since 2.6.35.  It's not feasible to really backport it all, and f14 isn't going to get rebased at this point in its lifecycle, so all I can really suggest is to try and reproduce this on f15 (which will continue to see rebases) or f16-beta.

Comment 3 Dave Jones 2012-02-01 16:15:48 UTC
are you still seeing this on f15/f16 ?

Comment 4 Michael 2012-02-02 00:00:43 UTC
I have not experienced this problem since installing F16. It probably makes sense to close this. Will reopen if I can reproduce it in F16 or higher.

Cheers,
Michael

Comment 5 Josh Boyer 2012-02-02 01:01:19 UTC
Thanks for letting us know.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.