On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 5:23 PM, Theodore Tso <tytso@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 03:57:32PM -0400, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: >> >> This but is *not* fixed. I just triggered it a few minutes ago by >> abusing i915 and drm, which caused a panic. This is slightly newer >> than 2.6.32-rc5, with a couple of i915 bugfixes thrown in. > > Andrew, can you test to see if this patch helps? > > Thanks, > > - Ted > > commit a8836b1d6f92273e001012c7705ae8f4c3d5fb65 > Author: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Tue Oct 27 15:36:38 2009 +0530 > > ext4: discard preallocation during truncate > > We need to make sure when we drop and reacquire the inode's > i_data_sem we discard the inode preallocation. Otherwise we > could have blocks marked as free in bitmap but still belonging > to prealloc space. > > Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode.c b/fs/ext4/inode.c > index 5c5bc5d..a1ef1c3 100644 > --- a/fs/ext4/inode.c > +++ b/fs/ext4/inode.c > @@ -209,6 +209,12 @@ static int try_to_extend_transaction(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode) > up_write(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_data_sem); > ret = ext4_journal_restart(handle, blocks_for_truncate(inode)); > down_write(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_data_sem); > + /* > + * We have dropped i_data_sem. So somebody else could have done > + * block allocation. So discard the prealloc space created as a > + * part of block allocation > + */ > + ext4_discard_preallocations(inode); > > return ret; > } > It looks like 2.6.32-rc6 is supposed to fix this bug, but it also looks like this patch didn't make it in. Should I still be using this patch? Thanks, Andy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-testers" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
