From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Zheng Liu Subject: Re: s390x: kernel BUG at fs/ext4/inode.c:1591! (powerpc too!) Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2013 00:52:29 +0800 Message-ID: <515C5E4D.3090403@gmail.com> References: <2133129347.8273339.1364549222854.JavaMail.root@redhat.com> <87ip46ss0o.fsf@openvz.org> <1211053180.322948.1364797847717.JavaMail.root@redhat.com> <87fvzaspr8.fsf@openvz.org> <874841142.414482.1364875584266.JavaMail.root@redhat.com> <877gkls1q7.fsf@openvz.org> <87r4isd1vn.fsf@openvz.org> <87li90q9mx.fsf@openvz.org> <87hajoq6s2.fsf@openvz.org> <87eherri5i.fsf@openvz.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Dmitry Monakhov , CAI Qian , Theodore Ts'o , LKML , linux-s390 , Steve Best , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org To: Christian Kujau Return-path: Received: from mail-pb0-f45.google.com ([209.85.160.45]:43241 "EHLO mail-pb0-f45.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760213Ab3DCQwg (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Apr 2013 12:52:36 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 04/04/2013 12:46 AM, Christian Kujau wrote: > On Wed, 3 Apr 2013 at 15:02, Dmitry Monakhov wrote: >> Good news big endian cpu owners >> Please try following patches(second is most important): >> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/233396/ >> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/233397/ >> I hope this should fix all known issues > > Zheng Liu also sent a patch: > > [PATCH] ext4: fix a big-endian bug when an extent is zeroed out > > When I try to apply all three of those to 3.9-4c4, the 2nd one from Dmitry > fails: > > $ cat ~/dev/002-ext4_fix-cpu_vs_disk-conversions.diff | patch --dry-run -p1 > patching file fs/ext4/extents.c > Hunk #2 FAILED at 2999. > Hunk #3 FAILED at 3272. > Hunk #4 FAILED at 4639. > 3 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file fs/ext4/extents.c.rej > patching file fs/ext4/indirect.c > Hunk #1 succeeded at 1539 (offset 215 lines). > patching file fs/ext4/inode.c > patching file fs/ext4/mmp.c > patching file fs/ext4/namei.c > patching file fs/ext4/super.c > Hunk #1 succeeded at 1951 (offset -3 lines). > patching file fs/ext4/xattr.c > patching file include/trace/events/ext4.h > Hunk #1 succeeded at 1956 (offset 8 lines). > Hunk #2 succeeded at 2060 (offset 8 lines). > Hunk #3 succeeded at 2079 (offset 8 lines). > > With only Dimitry's patchesm this happens, to -rc4: > > $ cat ~/dev/001-ext4_fix-usless-declarations.diff | patch -p1 > patching file fs/ext4/ialloc.c > patching file fs/ext4/ioctl.c > Hunk #1 succeeded at 359 (offset 4 lines). > patching file fs/ext4/mballoc.c > patching file fs/ext4/move_extent.c > > $ cat ~/dev/002-ext4_fix-cpu_vs_disk-conversions.diff | patch --dry-run -p1 > patching file fs/ext4/extents.c > Hunk #4 FAILED at 4639. > 1 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file fs/ext4/extents.c.rej > patching file fs/ext4/indirect.c > Hunk #1 succeeded at 1539 (offset 215 lines). > patching file fs/ext4/inode.c > patching file fs/ext4/mmp.c > patching file fs/ext4/namei.c > patching file fs/ext4/super.c > Hunk #1 succeeded at 1951 (offset -3 lines). > patching file fs/ext4/xattr.c > patching file include/trace/events/ext4.h > Hunk #1 succeeded at 1956 (offset 8 lines). > Hunk #2 succeeded at 2060 (offset 8 lines). > Hunk #3 succeeded at 2079 (offset 8 lines). I guess that is because Dmitry's patch is against dev branch of ext4 tree. Please applied my patch. I think it could fix the bug. That would be great if you could give this patch a try [1]. 1. http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/233555/ Thanks, - Zheng