From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.windriver.com (mail1.windriver.com [147.11.146.13]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9264860660 for ; Fri, 23 Aug 2013 02:03:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-hca.corp.ad.wrs.com [147.11.189.40]) by mail1.windriver.com (8.14.5/8.14.3) with ESMTP id r7N2327H027708 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 22 Aug 2013 19:03:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [128.224.162.224] (128.224.162.224) by ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (147.11.189.40) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.342.3; Thu, 22 Aug 2013 19:03:01 -0700 Message-ID: <5216C2BE.2080705@windriver.com> Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 10:02:38 +0800 From: Robert Yang User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130404 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Darren Hart References: <37674ce0aeae479e3cde7f578871ed47ec9025f8.1377175027.git.liezhi.yang@windriver.com> <1377192296.5259.7.camel@dvhart-mobl4.amr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <1377192296.5259.7.camel@dvhart-mobl4.amr.corp.intel.com> Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] e2fsprogs: properly set up extent header in do_write X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 02:03:01 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 08/23/2013 01:24 AM, Darren Hart wrote: > On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 09:13 -0400, Robert Yang wrote: >> do_write doesn't fully set up the first extent header on a new >> inode, so if we write a 0-length file, and don't write any data >> to the new file, we end up creating something that looks corrupt >> to kernelspace: >> >> EXT4-fs error (device loop0): ext4_ext_check_inode:464: inode #12: comm >> ls: bad header/extent: invalid magic - magic 0, entries 0, max 0(0), >> depth 0(0) >> >> Do something similar to ext4_ext_tree_init() here, and >> fill out the first extent header upon creation to avoid this. >> >> [YOCTO #3848] >> >> Signed-off-by: Robert Yang >> --- >> .../e2fsprogs-1.42.8/debugfs-extent-header.patch | 47 ++++++++++++++++++++ >> .../recipes-devtools/e2fsprogs/e2fsprogs_1.42.8.bb | 2 + > >> +Upstream-Status: Backport > > Should we backport? Or should we just update the revision we use? > Yes, I think so, Ted said that he had merge this patch a few days ago, but I didn't see where is it, I pulled this patch from the linux ext mailing list. // Robert