Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 30 Oct 2009 08:54:27 -0500 | From | Eric Sandeen <> | Subject | Re: [Bug 14354] Re: ext4 increased intolerance to unclean shutdown? |
| |
Theodore Tso wrote: > On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 04:38:57PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> I've been running my testcase, and I just hit the usual corruption with >> this patch in place after 8 iterations, I'm afraid. > > Eric, since you have a relatively controllable reproduction case, have > you tried reproducing Alexey's bisection results? Specifically he > seemed to find that commit fe188c0e shows no problem, and commit > 91ac6f43 is the first commit with problems?
I can try it but I have very little faith in that result to be honest.
> Having to do multiple iterations will make doing a bisection a major > pain, but maybe we'll get something out of that.
Well I've been doing bisects but I'm getting skeptical of the results; either my testcase isn't reliable enough or all the merges are confusing git-bisect (?) Anyway it keeps ending up on nonsensical commits.
> Other things that might be worth doing given that you have a test case > would be to try reverting commit 91ac6f43, and see if that helps, and > to try this patch: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=23468 > > Or have you tried some of these experiments already? > > Regards, > > - Ted
After talking to Aneesh last night, I think other good spot-checks will be to revert 487caeef9fc08c0565e082c40a8aaf58dad92bbb, and to test Jan's sync patches.
-Eric
| |