[lkml]   [2012]   [Oct]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Apparent serious progressive ext4 data corruption bug in 3.6.3 (and other stable branches?)
On 26 Oct 2012, Theodore Ts'o stated:

> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 09:37:08PM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> I can reproduce this on a small filesystem and stick the image somewhere
>> if that would be of any use to anyone. (If I'm very lucky, merely making
>> this offer will make the problem go away. :} )
> I'm not sure the image is going to be that useful. What we really
> need to do is to get a reliable reproduction of what _you_ are seeing.
> It's clear from Eric's experiments that journal_checksum is dangerous.
> That's why one of the things I asked you to do when you had time was
> to see if you could reproduce the problem you are seeing w/o
> nobarrier,journal_checksum,journal_async_commit.

OK. Will do tomorrow.

> The other experiment that would be really useful if you could do is to
> try to apply these two patches which I sent earlier this week:
> [PATCH 1/2] ext4: revert "jbd2: don't write superblock when if its empty
> [PATCH 2/2] ext4: fix I/O error when unmounting an ro file system
> ... and see if they make a difference.

As of tomorrow I'll be able to reboot without causing a riot: I'll test
it then. (Sorry for the delay :( )

> So I really don't want
> to push these patches to Linus until I get confirmation that they make
> a difference to *somebody*.


This isn't the first time that journal_checksum has proven problematic.
It's a shame that we're stuck between two error-inducing stools here...

NULL && (void)

 \ /
  Last update: 2012-10-26 23:41    [W:0.374 / U:1.124 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site