Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 14 Nov 2006 12:30:07 -0800 | From | Martin Bligh <> | Subject | Re: Boot failure with ext2 and initrds |
| |
> Never underestimate yourself, Martin ;)
Thanks ;-)
> Yes, those all looked like no-ops. The guilty party is ext2_new_blocks: > i386, x86_64 and ppc64 are now happily building on ext2s with this patch > below (I've been lazy, could have deleted your "E2FSBLK" addition too).
Yup, we started throwing away the error return code ;-(
> But I haven't attempted to correlate it with the loops seen (with OOMs > too on the x86_64, no idea why, but they've likewise melted away with > this patch). And I'm dubious whether it's the _right_ fix: the whole > mess of ints, unsigned longs and __u32s looks tricky to me, not some- > thing to sort out in a hurry - I'm only working with small filesystems > here (looped on a tmpfs file). (And if ret_block really should be an > ext2_fsblk_t there, shouldn't ext2_new_blocks return an ext2_fsblk_t > rather than an int?)
I was trying to harmonize it with what ext3 code does, but as Andrew understands this code a thousand times better than I, hopefully it's all fixed properly ;-)
> I see Andrew's sent me an alternative patch to try, I'll give that > a whirl now; and see if just making ext2_new_blocks return an > ext2_fsblk_t would do it too.
M. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |