[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200812100108.04163.andres@anarazel.de>
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 01:07:57 +0100
From: Andres Freund <andres@...razel.de>
To: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
Cc: adilger@....com, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
"Jonathan Bastien-Filiatrault" <joe@....org>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: EXT4 ENOSPC Bug
Hi Ted,
Very Strange:
I booted (after an crash which I did not see) a somewhat older kernel and I
once more caught the issue. Unfortunately I do not have your patch in this
older kernel.
older kernel: 2.6.28-rc5-andres-00070-g4e14e83
kernel I rean whole last week: 2.6.28-rc6-andres-00007-ged31348
There seem to have been no significant ext4 related changes to the kernel
between those.
for i in `seq 1 1000`;do touch tmp$i;done
touch: cannot touch `tmp139': No space left on device
...
rm tmp*;for i in `seq 1 200`;do dd if=/dev/zero of=tmp$i bs=1024k count=1;done
dd: opening `tmp139': No space left on device
139
..
Various different blocksizes and filesizes all return the same result.
This all hints to the patch Anesh linked. But it is included in 2.6.28-rc5.
Any idea how that could happen?
The kernel install is just a "make;make install; update-initramfs -c -k `make
kernelrelease`; update-grub" run...
A short idea how I could verify on binary level what kernelrelease it really
is?
If a somehow corrupted compile (murked ccache?) is the culprit of this (in
addition to my inaccuracies) I am very sorry for all your work.
I let this kernel run for the next hours if you want to run some tests...
Thanks,
Andres
Download attachment "signature.asc " of type "application/pgp-signature" (198 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists