From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vijayan Prabhakaran Subject: Re: Bug in data journaling patch ?! Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 11:23:54 -0500 Message-ID: References: <1092672478.12138.245.camel@watt.suse.com> Reply-To: Vijayan Prabhakaran Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com In-Reply-To: <1092672478.12138.245.camel@watt.suse.com> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Chris Mason Cc: reiser@namesys.com, vijayan@cs.wisc.edu, reiserfs-list@namesys.com Yes, this happens only on the first transaction after the mount. For all other later transactions it works fine. thanks, vijayan On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 12:07:59 -0400, Chris Mason wrote: > On Mon, 2004-08-16 at 11:47, Vijayan Prabhakaran wrote: > > > Bug description: > > ------------------ > > In journal.c there is a function called do_journal_end(). There is > > line in that function that initializes commit_trans_id. It looks like: > > > > commit_trans_id = jl->j_trans_id; > > > > The value of jl->j_trans_id was 0 (this could be due to some memset()). > > > > This would indeed be a bug, but it's not clear how jl->j_trans_id > becomes zero. > > A little farther down in do_journal_end, we set > SB_JOURNAL()->j_current_jl->j_trans_id to the transaction id of the next > transaction. It should be impossible for it to ever be zero. > > The only exception looks like the very first transaction for each > mount. The journal_init function doesn't set j_current_jl->j_trans_id > to a non-zero value. > > Can you confirm that you're only seeing this problem on the first > transaction? > > -chris > >