From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Fix(es) for ext2 fsync bug
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 13:26:49 -0600
Message-ID: <1171567609.14606.12.camel@kleikamp.austin.ibm.com>
References: <20070214195453.GB7521@nifty> <20070215142020.GA9930@thunk.org>
	 <1171552162.21710.9.camel@kleikamp.austin.ibm.com>
	 <op.tnsr13qnunckof@usensfaibisl2e.eng.emc.com>
	 <1171557542.14606.7.camel@kleikamp.austin.ibm.com>
	 <21e789ec0702151111v4cb2aa8dqa168c886cb909c9@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: sfaibish <sfaibish@emc.com>, Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>,
	Valerie Henson <val_henson@linux.intel.com>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Can Sar <csar@stanford.edu>,
	Dawson Engler <engler@csl.stanford.edu>
To: Junfeng Yang <junfeng@gmail.com>
Return-path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from e2.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.142]:34647 "EHLO e2.ny.us.ibm.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1030751AbXBOT0y (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 15 Feb 2007 14:26:54 -0500
Received: from d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (d01relay04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.236])
	by e2.ny.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l1FJQqq8017287
	for <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 14:26:52 -0500
Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (d01av04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.64])
	by d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.2) with ESMTP id l1FJQq21296122
	for <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 14:26:52 -0500
Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1])
	by d01av04.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l1FJQo0x002946
	for <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 14:26:51 -0500
In-Reply-To: <21e789ec0702151111v4cb2aa8dqa168c886cb909c9@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org

On Thu, 2007-02-15 at 11:11 -0800, Junfeng Yang wrote:
>         Hmm.  If jfs has the problem, it is a bug.  jfs is designed to
>         handle
>         this correctly.  I'm pretty sure I've fixed at least one bug
>         that 
>         eXplode has uncovered in the past.  I'm not sure what was
>         mentioned in
>         the presentation though.  I'd like any information about
>         current
>         problems in jfs.
> 
> 
> I believe you have fixed the JFS fsync bug, Dave.  It was caused by
> reusing a directory inode as a file inode.  If the machine crashes
> later, fsck would think this file is a directory, and clear all its
> data. 

Yeah.  That one was fixed a while back.  Thanks for clearing this up.

Shaggy

-- 
David Kleikamp
IBM Linux Technology Center