[U-Boot] [PATCH V5 1/2] ext4fs ls load support

[Tom Rini <trini@ti.com>]

On 09/13/2012 02:20 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Tom Rini,
> 
>> On 09/12/2012 03:57 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> On 09/12/2012 05:49 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 01:28:19PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
>>>>> On 08/13/2012 06:52 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>>>>>> Dear Rob Herring,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In message <50244D5A.3080304@gmail.com> you wrote:
>>>>>>> I reported already that the prior version that ext4 has issues with
>>>>>>> sub-directories. I don't think that has been addressed in V5. Some
>>>>>>> directories show up fine and some don't. So it's kind of random
>>>>>>> whether u-boot can read a /boot directory. This was after full
>>>>>>> ubuntu installs. I'd guess a simple test with a couple of files and
>>>>>>> directories will not show the problem.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We really need a test case here.  In my (certainly not very extensive)
>>>>>> tests I didn't see such a problem.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can you please describe what failed for you?
>>>>>
>>>>> I do an ubuntu install to a single ext4 fs and then ext2ls gives this:
>>>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>>> The problem is in the directories with sizes of 0. It does seem to be
>>>>> directories with higher blkno's. Perhaps the lack of support for hash
>>>>> table directory entries is a problem. Just guessing here as I don't
>>>>> know much about ext4 structure.
>>>>>
>>>>> I haven't been able to produce a simple example just creating a bunch
>>>>> of files and directories, so only the disk after an ubuntu install has
>>>>> the problem.
>>>>
>>>> I took an Ubuntu install I had (for x86) that was on a USB drive, had
>>>> been pretty extensively used, and was is ext4.  I couldn't find any size
>>>> 0 directories.  Are you able to reproduce this problem on other
>>>> hardware?  Is the image in question NOT remountable as ext3 (extents is
>>>> set, generated) ?  My biggest concern is breakage among ext2/3
>>>> filesystems.  Thanks!
>>>
>>> What size partition? It is also fine for me with a small 1.2GB
>>> partition. I only see the problem with larger partitions (most of a
>>> 250GB drive).
>>
>> This is a 240G partition.
>>
>>> I was under the impression that ext4 is not mountable as ext3.
>>
>> You can go ext3->"ext4"->ext3, it's only when you have fsck rebuild and
>> make use of extents, iirc, that it's no longer mountable as ext3.
> 
> Maybe you can pick that loop block driver from Pavel [1] and try it on sandbox 
> target? That might ease testing etc.

Only if Rob's image (which iirc is hooked up to a qemu target) still
fails once attached that way.  Rob, am I (a) remembering right that you
see this on a qemu target and (b) if so does compressing the crap out of
it yield a small enough file to put on dropbox or some other free cloud
storage?  Thanks!

-- 
Tom