From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Kasper Sandberg <lkml@metanurb.dk>,
LKML Mailinglist <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make some ext3 kernel messages useful by showing device
Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 08:43:20 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <484D3378.9090708@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080609025926.0ecb6aea.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sun, 08 Jun 2008 21:02:41 +0200 Kasper Sandberg <lkml@metanurb.dk> wrote:
>
>> Hello.
>>
>> Some of the ext3 warnings in super.c are not really as useful as they
>> can be, for instance the "EXT3-fs warning: maximal mount count reached,
>> running e2fsck is recommended" message, does not tell which device it
>> actually is.
>
> Seems sensible.
>
>> Below is patch(both inlined, and in attached form, since i dont trust my
>> mailer),
>
> That really tricks me. Because the resulting file applies nicely with
> `patch --dry-run' but doesn't apply with plain old `patch'. Inlined is
> preferred, attached is grumpily accepted, but please avoid duplicating
> the patch.
>
>> to a patch which fixes that particular message, and a few more.
>> I could look at the rest if anyones interrested?
>
> We like to keep ext3 and ext4 in sync as much as poss, please.
>
>> Oh, and i dont really know if this is nessecary, but:
>> Signed-off-by: Kasper Sandberg <lkml@metanurb.dk>
>
> It is very much preferred, thanks.
>
> (patch retained for linux-ext4 review)
The patch itself looks fine to me, and is a good idea. I recently saw a
confused user on another fs where successful mount messages were
followed by failure mount messages with no indication of which fs had
the trouble...
There probably are more spots in extX which could use this treatment...
should we maybe just be using ext3_warning in more places, which
automatically prints the sb, function name, etc?
-Eric
>> --- super.c.orig 2008-06-08 20:49:26.153047364 +0200
>> +++ super.c 2008-06-08 20:45:20.812047463 +0200
>> @@ -1188,31 +1188,31 @@
>> int res = 0;
>>
>> if (le32_to_cpu(es->s_rev_level) > EXT3_MAX_SUPP_REV) {
>> - printk (KERN_ERR "EXT3-fs warning: revision level too high, "
>> - "forcing read-only mode\n");
>> + printk (KERN_ERR "EXT3-fs on %s warning: revision level too high, "
>> + "forcing read-only mode\n", sb->s_id);
>> res = MS_RDONLY;
>> }
>> if (read_only)
>> return res;
>> if (!(sbi->s_mount_state & EXT3_VALID_FS))
>> - printk (KERN_WARNING "EXT3-fs warning: mounting unchecked fs, "
>> - "running e2fsck is recommended\n");
>> + printk (KERN_WARNING "EXT3-fs on %s warning: mounting unchecked fs, "
>> + "running e2fsck is recommended\n", sb->s_id);
>> else if ((sbi->s_mount_state & EXT3_ERROR_FS))
>> printk (KERN_WARNING
>> - "EXT3-fs warning: mounting fs with errors, "
>> - "running e2fsck is recommended\n");
>> + "EXT3-fs on %s warning: mounting fs with errors, "
>> + "running e2fsck is recommended\n", sb->s_id);
>> else if ((__s16) le16_to_cpu(es->s_max_mnt_count) >= 0 &&
>> le16_to_cpu(es->s_mnt_count) >=
>> (unsigned short) (__s16) le16_to_cpu(es->s_max_mnt_count))
>> printk (KERN_WARNING
>> - "EXT3-fs warning: maximal mount count reached, "
>> - "running e2fsck is recommended\n");
>> + "EXT3-fs on %s warning: maximal mount count reached, "
>> + "running e2fsck is recommended\n", sb->s_id);
>> else if (le32_to_cpu(es->s_checkinterval) &&
>> (le32_to_cpu(es->s_lastcheck) +
>> le32_to_cpu(es->s_checkinterval) <= get_seconds()))
>> printk (KERN_WARNING
>> - "EXT3-fs warning: checktime reached, "
>> - "running e2fsck is recommended\n");
>> + "EXT3-fs on %s warning: checktime reached, "
>> + "running e2fsck is recommended\n", sb->s_id);
>> #if 0
>> /* @@@ We _will_ want to clear the valid bit if we find
>> inconsistencies, to force a fsck at reboot. But for
>> @@ -1339,8 +1339,8 @@
>> }
>>
>> if (bdev_read_only(sb->s_bdev)) {
>> - printk(KERN_ERR "EXT3-fs: write access "
>> - "unavailable, skipping orphan cleanup.\n");
>> + printk(KERN_ERR "EXT3-fs on %s: write access "
>> + "unavailable, skipping orphan cleanup.\n", sb->s_id);
>> return;
>> }
>>
>>
>>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-09 13:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-08 19:02 [PATCH] Make some ext3 kernel messages useful by showing device Kasper Sandberg
2008-06-09 9:59 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-09 13:38 ` Kasper Sandberg
2008-06-09 20:48 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-09 13:43 ` Eric Sandeen [this message]
2008-06-09 20:49 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-09 22:08 ` Andreas Dilger
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=484D3378.9090708@redhat.com \
--to=sandeen@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkml@metanurb.dk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox