Thx, i had no idea about priority
dalto
May 6, 2021, 6:42pm
22
Yes, same exact package and name. They are literally just copies. There should be no changes or special handling needed.
Just add those repos and install the zfs-* packages you need.
OK, zfs-dkms
was just updated, and the archzfs packages will be updated soon. I’ve also opened a PR upstream with ZFS so the compat patches are backported to 2.0.4. Hang tight.
1 Like
mbod
May 7, 2021, 4:50am
24
Yes, and it works fine for me with 5.12 kernel
1 Like
mbod
May 25, 2021, 1:09pm
25
I just realized today that there is still a ZFS issue pending against kernel 5.12:
opened 12:12PM - 13 May 21 UTC
closed 06:58PM - 01 Jun 21 UTC
Type: Defect
Status: Triage Needed
<!--
Thank you for reporting an issue.
*IMPORTANT* - Please check our issue … tracker before opening a new issue.
Additional valuable information can be found in the OpenZFS documentation
and mailing list archives.
Please fill in as much of the template as possible.
-->
### System information
Type | Version/Name
--- | Linux version 5.12.3-arch1-1 (linux@archlinux) (gcc (GCC) 10.2.0, GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.36.1) #1 SMP PREEMPT Wed, 12 May 2021 17:54:18 +0000
Distribution Name | Archlinux
Distribution Version |
Linux Kernel | 5.12.3
Architecture | x86_64
ZFS Version | 2.0.4-1
SPL Version | 2.0.4-1
<!--
Commands to find ZFS/SPL versions:
modinfo zfs | grep -iw version
modinfo spl | grep -iw version
-->
### Describe the problem you're observing
after updating now that zfs-dkms/zfs-utils 2.0.4-2 can build on 5.12.x,
I noticed the traceback below in my logs
### Describe how to reproduce the problem
not sure
### Include any warning/errors/backtraces from the system logs
<!--
*IMPORTANT* - Please mark logs and text output from terminal commands
or else Github will not display them correctly.
An example is provided below.
Example:
```
this is an example how log text should be marked (wrap it with ```)
```
-->
```
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: ------------[ cut here ]------------
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: Attempted to advance past end of bvec iter
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: WARNING: CPU: 10 PID: 893850 at include/linux/bvec.h:105 iov_iter_advance+0x39a/0x3b0
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: Modules linked in: ip_set bonding tls nft_reject_inet nf_reject_ipv4 nf_reject_ipv6 nft_reject nft_limit nft_counter nft_ct nf_conntrack nf_defrag_ipv6 nf_defrag_ipv4 nf_tables >
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: acpi_call(OE) nfs_ssc drm fuse agpgart bpf_preload ip_tables x_tables ext4 crc32c_generic crc16 mbcache jbd2 hid_logitech_hidpp hid_logitech_dj ata_generic pata_acpi crc32c_int>
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: CPU: 10 PID: 893850 Comm: hg Tainted: P OE 5.12.3-arch1-1 #1
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: Hardware name: Supermicro H8SGL/H8SGL, BIOS 3.5b 03/18/2016
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: RIP: 0010:iov_iter_advance+0x39a/0x3b0
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: Code: 8a fe ff ff 4d 89 e1 45 31 d2 e9 42 ff ff ff 49 89 f2 e9 70 ff ff ff 48 c7 c7 28 77 1a a9 c6 05 6d 15 70 01 01 e8 bc f4 57 00 <0f> 0b 4c 8b 4b 18 eb b6 66 66 2e 0f 1f 84 0>
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: RSP: 0018:ffffa40e29407bd8 EFLAGS: 00010286
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffffa40e29407d40 RCX: ffff98585fd186e8
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: RDX: 00000000ffffffd8 RSI: 0000000000000027 RDI: ffff98585fd186e0
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: ffffa40e29407a08
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: R10: ffffa40e29407a00 R11: ffffffffa98cc448 R12: ffff985242e16540
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: R13: ffff9855758c5dc0 R14: ffffa40e29407c98 R15: ffffa40e29407d40
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: FS: 00007f74697bd740(0000) GS:ffff98585fd00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: CR2: 00007f746787b024 CR3: 00000004b4abc000 CR4: 00000000000406e0
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: Call Trace:
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: zpl_iter_write+0x184/0x1a0 [zfs]
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: do_iter_readv_writev+0x130/0x190
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: do_iter_write+0x7c/0x1b0
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: iter_file_splice_write+0x2ba/0x430
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: direct_splice_actor+0x2c/0x40
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: splice_direct_to_actor+0xf6/0x220
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: ? do_splice_direct+0xd0/0xd0
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: do_splice_direct+0x8b/0xd0
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: do_sendfile+0x322/0x490
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: __x64_sys_sendfile64+0x63/0xc0
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: RIP: 0033:0x7f74692d498e
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: Code: c3 0f 1f 00 4c 89 d2 4c 89 c6 e9 cd fd ff ff 0f 1f 44 00 00 31 c0 c3 0f 1f 44 00 00 f3 0f 1e fa 49 89 ca b8 28 00 00 00 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 8b 0d b2 c4 0>
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: RSP: 002b:00007ffc2cfd4fb8 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000028
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000004 RCX: 00007f74692d498e
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: RDX: 00007ffc2cfd4fc0 RSI: 0000000000000003 RDI: 0000000000000004
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: RBP: 0000557fa9e88768 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00007f7469783990
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: R10: 0000000000800000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 0000000000000003
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: R13: 00007ffc2cfd4fc0 R14: 0000000000800000 R15: 0000557fa9af8d40
mai 13 12:09:39 sarchx64 kernel: ---[ end trace 75c594ed02ce9de1 ]---
```
I found out by chance when i watched the journal today and it happened to me exactly at that time. It does not seem to have a negative side effect.
When I search the journal for “Attempted to advance past end of bvec iter” I find it 21 times since 5. May. It basically happens once every day.
2 Likes
Any of those reports on Arch? I run ZFS, and it is (so far safely) up to Linux 5.12.6-zen1-1-zen with appropriate ZFS modules. No known issues…
dalto
May 25, 2021, 7:59pm
27
That report is in relation to an Arch kernel.
There is something relevant near the bottom:
Based on inspection of the Linux kernel code, this warning comes from bvec_iter_advance()
in include/linux/bvec.h, when the caller attempts to advance the byte range past the end of the bvec. This check is also in 5.11, but it can’t be hit because iov_iter_advance()
in lib/iov_iter.c doesn’t have a special case for bvec iters that winds up calling bvec_iter_advace()
; instead it falls through to a more generic case that advances the bvec iter without performing this check. Given this, the underlying issue is probably present in 5.11 and previous kernels, it’s just not being warned about there.
1 Like
Thanks for the info. So - I am working with a timebomb ticking… Good thing I’ve got a net (clone of data drive)…
dalto
May 25, 2021, 8:05pm
29
Since zfs on Linux is pretty widely used, given the above, it is more likely that it is not a major issue.
1 Like
Reading through the new comments, it looks like this issue has been happening with previous kernels, it just hasn’t been popping up in logs before kernel 5.12.
1 Like