[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4CE18892.9020908@ddn.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 20:22:58 +0100
From: Bernd Schubert <bschubert@....com>
To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
CC: Bernd Schubert <bs_lists@...ef.fastmail.fm>,
"linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] make ext4_valid_block_bitmap() more verbose
On 11/15/2010 05:21 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 11/12/10 5:26 PM, Bernd Schubert wrote:
>> The real issue we want to debug with the patch below actually came up while
>> stress testing Lustre using the RHEL5.5 kernel (so 2.6.32'ish ext4), but a
>> more verbose error function should not hurt for vanilla ext4 either.
>>
>> make ext4_valid_block_bitmap() more verbose
>>
>> While running our stress test suite, ext4_valid_block_bitmap()
>> frequently complains about an invalid block bitmap.
>> However, e2fsck does not find anything. So in oder to be able
>> to better debug this issue, make the function more verbose and
>> let it complain about the two possible invalid bitmaps.
>
> Making a raw e2image of the problematic filesystem would let us take a
> look at why e2fsck isn't finding problems; unless you plan to fix that
> yourself as well, which is just fine of course. :)
>
I already captured an e2image and will do again on Wednesday, now that I
could reproduce it again with the updated code. Unfortunately no time
before. Will try to check out myself with debugfs first, if there is
really something wrong. It might be a race in the code as well...
Cheers,
Bernd
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (263 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists