[lkml]   [2010]   [Jul]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    Patch in this message
    SubjectRe: 2.6.35-r5 ext3 corruptions
    On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 08:45:12AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
    > On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 08:57:45PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
    > > Upgrading my test vms from 2.6.35-rc3 to 2.6.35-rc5 is resulting in
    > > repeated errors on the root drive of a test VM:
    > >
    > > { 1532.368808] EXT3-fs error (device sda1): ext3_lookup: deleted inode referenced: 211043
    > > [ 1532.370859] Aborting journal on device sda1.
    > > [ 1532.376957] EXT3-fs (sda1):
    > > [ 1532.376976] EXT3-fs (sda1): error: ext3_journal_start_sb: Detected aborted journal
    > > [ 1532.376980] EXT3-fs (sda1): error: remounting filesystem read-only
    > > [ 1532.420361] error: remounting filesystem read-only
    > > [ 1532.621209] EXT3-fs error (device sda1): ext3_lookup: deleted inode referenced: 211043
    > >
    > > The filesysetm is a mess when checked on reboot - lots of illegal
    > > references to blocks, multiply linked blocks, etc, but repairs.
    > > Files are lots, truncated, etc, so there is visible filesystem
    > > damage.
    > >
    > > I did lots of testing on 2.6.35-rc3 and came across no problems;
    > > problems only seemed to start with 2.6.35-rc5, and I've reproduced
    > > the problem on a vanilla 2.6.35-rc4.
    > >
    > > The problem seems to occur randomly - sometimes during boot or when
    > > idle after boot, sometimes a while after boot. I haven't done any
    > > digging at all for the cause - all I've done so far is confirm that
    > > it is reproducable and it's not my code causing the problem.
    > Looks like this problem was isolated to a single VM and root
    > filesystem. I could not reproduce it on anything other than the
    > one filesystem that was failing.

    Ok, so now I know *why* that one filesystem got busted - I built a
    kernel without CONFIG_EXT3_DEFAULTS_TO_ORDERED set and it got a
    forced reboot (echo b > proc/sysrq-trigger). That'll teach me for
    trying to reproduce bugs Andrew is tripping over with his config

    Quite frankly, data=writeback mode for ext3 is a dangerous,
    dangerous configuration to run by default. IMO, it shouldn't be the
    default. Patch below.



    Dave Chinner

    ext3: default to ordered mode

    From: Dave Chinner <>

    data=writeback mode is dangerous and is leads to filesystem
    corruption, data loss and stale data exposure when systems crash. It
    should not be the default, especially when all major distros ensure
    their ext3 filesystems default to ordered mode. Change the default
    mode to the safer data=ordered mode, because we should be caring
    far more about avoiding corruption than performance.

    Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <>
    fs/ext3/Kconfig | 1 +
    1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

    diff --git a/fs/ext3/Kconfig b/fs/ext3/Kconfig
    index 522b154..e8c6ba0 100644
    --- a/fs/ext3/Kconfig
    +++ b/fs/ext3/Kconfig
    @@ -31,6 +31,7 @@ config EXT3_FS
    bool "Default to 'data=ordered' in ext3"
    depends on EXT3_FS
    + default y
    The journal mode options for ext3 have different tradeoffs
    between when data is guaranteed to be on disk and

     \ /
      Last update: 2010-07-21 08:35    [W:0.024 / U:8.440 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site