search for: bh_jdirti

Hello all, I am trying to integerate 0.0.6b with our kernel RPM here and have come across an interesting conflict. I want to include the raid patch that Red Hat includes in their kernel but that patch includes the following hunk: --- linux/include/linux/fs.h.orig Tue Jan 16 13:30:09 2001 +++ linux/include/linux/fs.h Tue Jan 16 13:47:18 2001 @@ -191,6 +191,7 @@ #define BH_Req 3 /* 0 if the

I previously wrote: > I have come across what appears to be a bug in __invalidate_buffers() > w.r.t. the change in ext3-0.0.6 using BH_JDirty instead of BH_Dirty > for buffers held in the journal. If invalidate_buffers() is called > on a device (LVM likes to do this a lot, for whatever reason), it yanks > JDirty buffers out from underneath the journal layer, and causes an > oops

SYSTEM: rh6x based system, 2.2.19-6.2.7 rh errata kernel + 0.0.7a patch, I rebuilt rpm for i686; celeron466, 64MB, PIIX4. root fs is on software raid1 ext2, 6 additional fs's on software raid1 ext2. There's a 3rd HD, not mirrored, which is mounted ext3. EXT3-fs: mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. I enabled journal with tune2fs -j with unmounted fs. The 3 HDs are tuned with

Hi, A system running ext3 crashed this afternoon (nothing to do with ext3, bad network driver). Is was saving a file from emacs when it happened. The file system is 0.06b and had ordered data as the mount option. Let me emphasize this was running ext3 pure, not with SnapFS or InterMezzo layered on top of it. strace reveals that Emacs does open("existing file name", O_TRUNC |