From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759044AbZBRWvm (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Feb 2009 17:51:42 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759238AbZBRWsW (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Feb 2009 17:48:22 -0500 Received: from THUNK.ORG ([69.25.196.29]:52140 "EHLO thunker.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758751AbZBRWsV (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Feb 2009 17:48:21 -0500 Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 17:25:17 -0500 From: Theodore Tso To: Tim Gardner Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: Ubuntu Jaunty ext3 --> ext4 upgrade issue Message-ID: <20090218222517.GT3600@mini-me.lan> Mail-Followup-To: Theodore Tso , Tim Gardner , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" References: <499C4F1E.8050901@canonical.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <499C4F1E.8050901@canonical.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tytso@thunk.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on thunker.thunk.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 11:10:38AM -0700, Tim Gardner wrote: > I've encountered a situation where the patches that you've proposed for > stable updates might be causing some issues. This user ivoks appears to > have an upgrade issue. I assume he's enabled ext4 on an existing ext3 > file system. Hopefully I can get more details. Have you seen anything > like this? No, this is the first I've heard of it. > i'm getting 'Invalid or unsupported executable format' from grub > on all jaunty's generic kernels since (including) 2.6.28-7 So grub is complaining that it can't boot from a partition after upgrading to the new kernel with the for-stable patches? Um, that's interesting. So the obvious thing to check is to do an md5 checksum of the kernel in /boot to make sure it didn't get corrupted somehow. The other thing to check would be to ask the user to run e2fsck to rule out filesystem corruption. OTOH, if this was just a simple install and upgrade, presumably the new kernel would have been installed while the previous kernel was booted. I do my testing by using a ext3 /boot partition (since my crash-and-burn netbook is running Ubuntu Jaunty). So I wouldn't have noticed anything, but this seems very odd. More information would be useful; is there a Launchpad bug open on this yet? Or we can work this out on LKML or the linux-ext4 mailing list if the reporter is willing to be cc'ed on the thread.... - Ted