[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121101061212.16497.qmail@science.horizon.com>
Date: 1 Nov 2012 02:12:12 -0400
From: "George Spelvin" <linux@...izon.com>
To: darrick.wong@...cle.com, tytso@....edu
Cc: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux@...izon.com, tm@....ma
Subject: Re: ext4: fix metadata checksum calculation for the superblock
> This one was cc'ed to stable@...r.kernel.org. But when you said "I
> notice, that neither of thse have made it into 2.6.5", I assume you
> meant 3.5?
Whoops, typo! I meant 3.6.5, the very latest just-out-today stable
kernel.
Quite a few 3.6.x kernels have come out since that patch was Cc'ed,
and it keeps not being included. So I wondered.
> So that means it should eventually make it to the 3.4.x and 3.6.x
> kernels.
That's what I thought, but I didn't want to pester Greg until I was sure
of your intentions.
> At this point I'll just include it in the patches to be sent to Linus
> at the next merge window, mainly because I don't have the time to run
> a separate regression test run just for this patch, and it's only a
> cosmetic issue, right?
Well, it causes the file system to be marked dirty and unnecessarily
checked on reboot, which I contend is a bug, but it's not a data-loss
bug.
I do worry that it could cause file lookup to fail when it shouldn't,
which *is* effectively a data-loss bug, even if the data reappears
on reboot. But I'd have to understand the problem and fix better to
know if that actually happens; I haven't observed it.
--
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