[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <49D4BDF2.2070102@ph.tum.de>
Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2009 15:30:26 +0200
From: Thiemo Nagel <thiemo.nagel@...tum.de>
To: Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@...il.com>,
Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
CC: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.29-git: cannot mount ext4/loop
Alexander Beregalov wrote:
> 2009/4/2 Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@...il.com>:
>> 2009/4/2 Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@...il.com>:
>>> 2009/4/2 Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>:
>>>> On Thu, Apr 02, 2009 at 02:53:51AM +0400, Alexander Beregalov wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Apr 02, 2009 at 01:23:28AM +0400, Alexander Beregalov wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Theodore, Jens
>>>>>>
>>>>>> kernel is 2.6.29-07099-g8b53ef3
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mount failed:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> EXT4-fs: barriers enabled
>>>>>> kjournald2 starting: pid 1867, dev loop0:8, commit interval 5 seconds
>>>>>> EXT4-fs error (device loop0): ext4_iget: block reference 2703228928 >=
>>>>>> max (524288) in inode #2, offset=0
>>>>>> EXT4-fs: get root inode failed
>>>>>> EXT4-fs (device loop0): mount failed
This message indicates that the inode contains a reference to a block
outside the filesystem at inode->i_data[0].
When I added the block range checks, initially I was assuming that
when EXTENTS_FL is not set, the inode->i_data *always* contains
references to further blocks. Ted showed me wrong and added the condition
ISREG() || ISDIR() || ( ISLNK() && !is_fast_symlink() )
before that assumption can be made. But maybe we need some further
restraints?
Kind regards,
Thiemo
--
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