[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1273794682.21352.199.camel@pasglop>
Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 09:51:22 +1000
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Saeed Bishara <saeed@...vell.com>,
Nicolas Pitre <nico@...vell.com>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...isc-linux.org>
Subject: Re: Rampant ext3/4 corruption on 2.6.34-rc7 with VIVT ARM (Marvell
88f5182)
On Thu, 2010-05-13 at 17:12 +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> If you look at the array more in detail, you'll notice that 'offs' part of
> structure is sometimes identical. That should never happen because 'offs'
> contains offset of the corresponding directory entry in a block. So when
> offsets are identical in this array, subsequent move will copy some entries
> several times and leave entries that should be moved in the old block,
> resulting in a corruption we see.
> The question is, how could offsets be the same? dx_make_map seems to get
> it right and dx_sort_map as well. Maybe I'd peek into disassembly of
> dx_sort_map to see whether swap() macro does what it should... If that
> looks OK, you could try adding some debug checks into dx_sort_map and try
> to catch the moment when duplicate offsets are created...
Ok so a very quick test with another compiler and the problem -appears-
gone. I'll investigate more in depth later tonight or this week-end.
Looks like it may all have been a false alarm, just don't use
gcc-4.4.0 :-)
Cheers,
Ben.
--
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