[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200911031432.nA3EWV8l020006@demeter.kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 14:32:31 GMT
From: bugzilla-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org
To: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [Bug 14354] Bad corruption with 2.6.32-rc1 and upwards
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14354
--- Comment #173 from Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com> 2009-11-03 14:32:26 ---
(In reply to comment #172)
> There's a lot more we need to understand --- including why we weren't seeing a
> printk message indicating a journal checksum, and which commit was showing the
> checksum failure, and why we ended up seeing a checksum failure in the first
> place. If it was the last commit that was being written right before the
> system crash, the commit block simply should have been missing due to the
> barrier. But we can do this without having to worry about 2.6.32 being a QA
> disaster for ext4. :-)
I am looking for the checksum problem today. I agree, seeing an
otherwise-valid commit block w/ a bad checksum is very troubling - barrier
infrastructure problems? Or something else, will have to see.
I know why we're not seeing a printk, already; it's under a RDONLY test, and
the root fs is mounted readonly; I have a patch for that though I wonder what
the right choice is when we encounter this corruption - I'm leaning towards
treating it like any other corruption and going through ext4_error...
...anyway, still looking at all this today, even w/ the .32 qa disaster averted
for now. :)
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching the assignee of the bug.
--
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