From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Sandeen Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix ext2 allocator overflows above 31 bit blocks Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 19:43:39 -0500 Message-ID: <46295E3B.2070503@redhat.com> References: <4628F3ED.9040101@redhat.com> <20070420230208.GU5967@schatzie.adilger.int> <46294967.6070601@redhat.com> <1177115236.3778.23.camel@dyn9047017103.beaverton.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , ext4 development To: cmm@us.ibm.com Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:59066 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753926AbXDUAns (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Apr 2007 20:43:48 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1177115236.3778.23.camel@dyn9047017103.beaverton.ibm.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org Mingming Cao wrote: > On Fri, 2007-04-20 at 18:14 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> It's a bug, today. > > They are fixed in mm tree, as part of the patches which backports ext3 > block reservation code to ext2. filesystem block numbers are all > ext2_fsblk_t type(i.e. unsigned long)(see ext2_new_blocks()). Maybe need > a round of thorough review to see if anything left, but I think what in > mm tree looks good. Oh... oops. I didn't think to check mm, didn't expect to find those changes on ext2. Ok, I will double-check that against what I did. > And those patches in mm tree also backports the ext3 best-effort > allocates multiple blocks code (allocate multiple blocks within the > block reservation window as much as possible), FYI. Ok, thanks Mingming! -Eric