[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130403122058.GB7741@thunk.org>
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2013 08:20:58 -0400
From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To: Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@...nvz.org>,
Christian Kujau <lists@...dbynature.de>,
CAI Qian <caiqian@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-s390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
Steve Best <sbest@...hat.com>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: fix a big-endian bug when an extent is zeroed out
On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 06:22:04PM +0800, Zheng Liu wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH] ext4: fix a big-endian bug when an extent is zeroed out
>
> From: Zheng Liu <wenqing.lz@...bao.com>
>
> When an extent was zeroed out, we forgot to do convert from cpu to le16.
> It could make us hit a BUG_ON when we try to write dirty pages out. So
> fix it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zheng Liu <wenqing.lz@...bao.com>
Thanks for finding this! I think we should push this to Linus right
away, and not wait for the next merge window. The bug has been here
for a long time, but it was unmasked by the fact that we unbroke
extent zeroing in 3.9-rcX.
I have two big questions. (1) Shouldn't Eric Whitney have picked this
up with his ARM pandaboard testing, since IIRC it's big-endian as
well? If not, is there something we can do to improve our testing wrt
to big-endian systems?
And (2) does it make sense to have an inline function
ext4_ext_set_len(len)? It might save some lines of code, but more
importantly, it might make it less likely that we will overlook this
sort of bug in the future.
- Ted
--
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