| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2007 11:26:57 -0500 From: Daniel Drake <ddrake@...ntes3d.com> To: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org Subject: e2fsck and human intervention Hi, I'm working with ext3 partitions in a product environment, where numerous embedded Linux systems will be shipped to various locations. In testing we occasionally find that system boot is halted by e2fsck with an "UNEXPECTED INCONSISTENCY" error message. This is while running in preen mode. This usually happens during e2fsck's regular "check every X mounts" thing, as opposed to immediately after booting up after power loss, so to begin with it's not immediately obvious why there is a problem. It's of course understandable and inevitable that power loss will occasionally cause some file loss or corruption, and that's fine. My main concern is that fsck is halting the boot process, and in a product scenario this would require an engineer to perform a service call. If e2fsck could unconditionally perform a best-effort attempt at solving the problems, it would be ideal. Are there any better approaches than something like the following? 1. Run "e2fsck -p /" 2. If bit 3 is set in exit code (i.e. preen functionality detected unexpected inconsistency) then run "e2fsck -y /" Is there significant risk of further data loss through using -y than might be experienced otherwise? Thanks! -- Daniel Drake Brontes Technologies, A 3M Company - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists