similar to: data corrupting bug in 2.4.20 ext3, data=journal

Hi, as I mentioned in earlier mail to ext3-users I have been getting some corruption on an ext3 filesystem that has been serving NFS. I am now confident that I fully understand the problem and have a patch. It only affects data=journal mode and I wonder if it might also be the cause of the corruption noted by a number of people on linux-kernel. First I will explain the problem. Then display

Hi Stephen, I'm one of developers of SnapFS, which based on Ext3. I got Assertion failure from SnapFS, at ext3_new_block() in fs/ext3/balloc.c: J_ASSERT (!test_and_set_bit(BH_Alloced, &bh->b_state)) If J_ASSERT is only use as debug, why it will modify data? I found the 'BH_Alloced' flag only occures at two place: one is balloc.c as above, the other is at journal_forget() in

Hello. I found bugs on error handlings in the functions arround the ext3 file system, which cause inadequate completions of synchronous write I/O operations when disk I/O failures occur. Both 2.4 and 2.6 have this problem. I carried out following experiment: 1. Mount a ext3 file system on a SCSI disk with ordered mode. 2. Open a file on the file system with O_SYNC|O_RDWR|O_TRUNC|O_CREAT

Well.... you might remember that I have had problems will my NFS fileserver that run ext3 with data=journal. The filesystem corruption now seems too be solved with the patch (plus amendment) that I posted, so I am happy about that... but there is more. I have known for a while that ext3 doesn't behave very well when the journal fills up. If it finds that the journal is full, and the

Hi, By running some scripts on our target system for a while, I lost all means of access to the system. It seems that the kernel is crashed with the following error message: Assertion failure in do_get_write_access() at transaction.c:731: "(((jh2bh(jh))->b_state & (1UL << BH_Uptodate)) != 0)" Oops: Exception in kernel mode, sig: 4 We are currently running Linux version

All, I know that there is no official port to Kernel 2.4.4, thus I may not get any help, however I am hoping someone could point me in the right direction for my problem. I am currently forced to use kernel 2.4.4 for reasons out of my control (embedded board). Here are the exact versions of everything I'm running: ExT3 Version: ext3-2.4-0.9.6-248 Util Version: util-linux-2.11f.tar.bz2 e2fs

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

Hi all (and developers in particular) I just got bitten by this Assertion. The one that starts as in the subject, and ends with: "!(((jh2bh(jh))->b_state & (1UL << BH_Lock)) != 0)" Google reminds me that it was mentioned a few times earlier this year, but I couldn't find any statement saying that it has been fixed. I got this in a 2.4.16 kernel, though the

It's both in 2.6 and recent 2.6 (for RH ASS2.1 you'll probably need to copy the latest 2.4 defintion, but I don't care for obsolete junk). Index: src/super.c =================================================================== --- src/super.c (revision 1014) +++ src/super.c (working copy) @@ -799,7 +799,7 @@ /* get first two blocks */ for (i=0; i<2; i++) { - bhs[i] = getblk

On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 08:25:43PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > Excerpts from Will Deacon's message of July 2, 2020 6:02 pm: > > On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 05:48:36PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/qspinlock.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/qspinlock.h > >> new file mode 100644 > >> index 000000000000..f84da77b6bb7 >

On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 08:25:43PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > Excerpts from Will Deacon's message of July 2, 2020 6:02 pm: > > On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 05:48:36PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/qspinlock.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/qspinlock.h > >> new file mode 100644 > >> index 000000000000..f84da77b6bb7 >

We have DELL 2650 with CENTOS 3.4 installed. Today I saw following messages on /var/log/messages. Anyone know what it mean? Does it point to which disk? =================================== Jun 4 06:58:40 ORA03 kernel: EXT3-fs unexpected failure: (((jh2bh(jh))->b_state & (1UL << BH_Uptodate)) != 0); Jun 4 06:58:40 ORA03 kernel: Possible IO failure. Jun 4 06:58:40 ORA03 kernel:

Nicholas Piggin <npiggin at gmail.com> writes: > Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin at gmail.com> > --- > arch/powerpc/include/asm/paravirt.h | 28 ++++++++ > arch/powerpc/include/asm/qspinlock.h | 66 +++++++++++++++++++ > arch/powerpc/include/asm/qspinlock_paravirt.h | 7 ++ > arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/Kconfig | 5 ++ >

Nicholas Piggin <npiggin at gmail.com> writes: > Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin at gmail.com> > --- > arch/powerpc/include/asm/paravirt.h | 28 ++++++++ > arch/powerpc/include/asm/qspinlock.h | 66 +++++++++++++++++++ > arch/powerpc/include/asm/qspinlock_paravirt.h | 7 ++ > arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/Kconfig | 5 ++ >

On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 05:48:36PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/qspinlock.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/qspinlock.h > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..f84da77b6bb7 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/qspinlock.h > @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@ > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > +#ifndef _ASM_POWERPC_QSPINLOCK_H >

On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 05:48:36PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/qspinlock.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/qspinlock.h > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..f84da77b6bb7 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/qspinlock.h > @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@ > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > +#ifndef _ASM_POWERPC_QSPINLOCK_H >

Hi, I found the following, suspect looking, gem in ext3-2.4-0.9.1-246.gz. Is this supposed to compile or is it just a tyypo ? +enum jbd_state_bits { + BH_JWrite + = BH_PrivateStart, /* 1 if being written to log (@@@ DEBUGGING) */ + BH_Freed, /* 1 if buffer has been freed (truncated) */ Rik -- Virtual memory is like a game you can't win; However, without

v3 is updated to use __pv_queued_spin_unlock, noticed by Waiman (thank you). Thanks, Nick Nicholas Piggin (6): powerpc/powernv: must include hvcall.h to get PAPR defines powerpc/pseries: move some PAPR paravirt functions to their own file powerpc: move spinlock implementation to simple_spinlock powerpc/64s: implement queued spinlocks and rwlocks powerpc/pseries: implement paravirt

v3 is updated to use __pv_queued_spin_unlock, noticed by Waiman (thank you). Thanks, Nick Nicholas Piggin (6): powerpc/powernv: must include hvcall.h to get PAPR defines powerpc/pseries: move some PAPR paravirt functions to their own file powerpc: move spinlock implementation to simple_spinlock powerpc/64s: implement queued spinlocks and rwlocks powerpc/pseries: implement paravirt

Hello, Over the last month or so, I've noticed the following error showing up repeatedly in my system logs under kernel 2.4.18-ac3 and more recently under 2.4.19-rc1: EXT3-fs error (device ide0(3,3)) in ext3_new_inode: error 28 I've now been able to capture the following Oops before the system went down entirely: Assertion failure in do_get_write_access() at transaction.c:611: