Andrew Morton wrote: > > Begin forwarded message: > > Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 16:44:39 +0800 > From: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@xxxxxxxxx> > To: LKML <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: [BUG -mm] ext3_orphan_add() accessing corrupted list on a corrupted ext3fs > > > I accidentally ran two qemu instances on the same ext3 fs, after that bad > things happened. After exiting the two qemus and running a new one, I got the > following oops: Is this equivalent to mounting the same SAN block device on 2 different machines? And if so how much can the filesystem really be expected to cope with this? (remembering to read the rest of his inbox...) Andreas Dilger wrote: > I don't have a comment on the actual bug here, but this is another case > where it would be nice to have multi-mount protection built into ext3... > When I last proposed this it was refused on the grounds that an external > HA manager should be doing this job but I don't think that is realistic. I'm with Andreas on this one, in the era of SANs, iscsi, virtual machines, and suspended images, it would be nice to prevent multiple mounts at the fs (or vfs?) level.... -Eric - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
