[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B06B9CA.1030502@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 09:46:18 -0600
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
CC: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, tytso@....edu
Subject: Re: norecovery option for ext3
Jan Kara wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've tried to test noload/norecovery option of ext3 and I've found it
> simply does not work. The filesystem does not even mount. There are two
> problems:
> 1) the code checking for NOLOAD in ext3_fill_super is simply wrong
> and ends up failing the mount whenever NOLOAD is set with a message
> "ext3: No journal on filesystem on <dev>"
> 2) if one fixes the check, we end up oopsing a few lines below when
> calling journal_check_available_features() with journal == NULL.
>
> Given that nobody used the option (OK, some googling shows that somebody
> tried to use it in *2.4.9* kernel and it didn't work even there - Stephen
> Tweedie comments that it's an obsolete option meant for use during fs
> development) and seeing how badly corrupted the filesystem is when you
> don't replay the journal, I'd just remove the option. Any opinions?
>
> Honza
Oh, sigh. Sorry, didn't actually, er, test it, since I was just adding
an alias for the option... bleah.
I think we should fix it; there are cases when you may want to mount that
way, I think - for example, otherwise there is no way at all to mount
a block device which is marked readonly...
-Eric
--
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