From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Oleg Drokin Subject: Re: How to break a reiserfs on Linux 2.4.20 Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 18:22:01 +0300 Message-ID: <20030116182201.A28414@namesys.com> References: <20030116104906.A7078@namesys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Zygo Blaxell Cc: reiserfs-list@namesys.com Hello! On Thu, Jan 16, 2003 at 09:16:11AM -0500, Zygo Blaxell wrote: > Oleg Drokin wrote: > >Yes, we were able to reproduce the problem and now we are trying to fix it. > >Thanks a lot for your help and for the script. > Excellent! :-) > Just on a whim, I ran the tests on a different kernel image yesterday > and got some different results in the syslog: > Jan 15 18:26:00 berkelium kernel: journal-569: flush_commit_list, block already dirty! Hm, these are something new for me. > Jan 15 18:26:00 berkelium kernel: vs-13060: reiserfs_update_sd: stat data of object [537145 537147 0x0 SD] (nlink == 6) not found (pos 2) I've seen these too right from the beginning. > Then the kernel panicked. I'm going to try this again and try to capture the Same for me. And I saw more debugging messages in fact. > The main difference between the two kernels (aside from whether various SCSI > and RAID drivers are built-in or modules) is the SMP flag and CPU type > (Pentium 3 uniprocessor vs. 586 SMP). Neither one had the REISER_CHECK > option set. Was the kernel in SMP mode? (I do my tests on UP) Bye, Oleg