[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0611202031370.5912@blonde.wat.veritas.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 20:54:14 +0000 (GMT)
From: Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
cc: cmm@...ibm.com, Mel Gorman <mel@...net.ie>,
"Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@...igh.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Boot failure with ext2 and initrds
On Mon, 20 Nov 2006, Hugh Dickins wrote:
>
> I'll do a little staring at the code myself: I'm unlikely to notice
> anything you've missed, but there's just a chance staring at it will
> direct me to some detail I've jotted down from before.
Not found anything relevant, but I keep noticing these lines
in ext2_try_to_allocate_with_rsv(), ext3 and ext4 similar:
} else if (grp_goal > 0 &&
(my_rsv->rsv_end - grp_goal + 1) < *count)
try_to_extend_reservation(my_rsv, sb,
*count-my_rsv->rsv_end + grp_goal - 1);
They're wrong, a no-op in most groups, aren't they? rsv_end is an
absolute block number, whereas grp_goal is group-relative, so the
calculation ought to bring in group_first_block? Or I'm confused.
(Whereas in my hang the grp_goal to ext2_try_to_allocate was -1
when I looked, with group 0 and num 1.)
Hugh
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists