>From Erez Zadok <ezk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on 22 Sep 2003: > Now, it's quite possible that we're not doing something right in > versionfs > which messes ext3 up. We're unable to tickle this assertion directly That is very possible. Do you mind show me the related versionfs code? Ext3 need to reserve the number of block it need to modify on creating the the transaction. If your versionfs dirty some block, which I think it will, it need to reserved the extra blocks in ext3_journal_start(). Without doing so can result in the problem you describe. > 1. Are there any more known ext3 bugs of the sort that have been > reported? > If so, are there fixes anywhere? (We didn't see anything new wrt > ext3 in > the 2.4.23-pre series.) I think there is a good chance you did not reserved it right. > > FWIW, we're managed to narrow down the problem to the area in our code > that > uses the sendfile functionality. We use sendfile inside our file system > to > make a copy of a file before it'd be modified, for versioning purposes. Again, I would like to take a look at your related versionfs change. BTW, you might want to post on ext2-devel as well. Regards, Chris _______________________________________________ Ext3-users@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ext3-users
