[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-id: <20090629214959.GT3570@webber.adilger.int>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 23:49:59 +0200
From: Andreas Dilger <adilger@....com>
To: Akira Fujita <a-fujita@...jp.nec.com>
Cc: "Steinar H. Gunderson" <sgunderson@...foot.com>,
Kazuya Mio <k-mio@...jp.nec.com>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Segmentation fault in e4defrag -c
On Jun 29, 2009 15:03 +0900, Akira Fujita wrote:
> > Size: 4050385 Blocks: 0 IO Block: 4096 regular file
> > Device: fd12h/64786d Inode: 688755 Links: 1
> > Access: (0644/-rw-r--r--) Uid: ( 1000/ sesse) Gid: ( 1000/ sesse)
> > Access: 2009-05-30 03:08:38.724454316 +0200
> > Modify: 2008-09-01 20:38:26.135589449 +0200
> > Change: 2008-09-01 20:38:26.135589449 +0200
>
> File size is "4050385" but Blocks is "0"
> probably means blocks are not allocated yet or file is *corrupted*.
> Is your mp3 file available?
Well, this is a sparse file for some reason (e.g. failed mp3 p2p download).
> Anyway, with this patch, 0 blocks file is skipped,
> therefore the segmentation fault you had will not happen.
Is it possible that the code has not been tested with sparse files?
In that case, the check for size == 0 is only going to catch a single
case of problem, and not handle general sparse files.
Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group
Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.
--
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