On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 03:52:13PM +0530, Girish Shilamkar wrote:
> I went through the code and also re-ran the e2fsprogs tests which we had
> sent upstream for journal checksum. And found that if the transaction is
> bad it is marked as info->end_transaction which indicates a bad
> transaction and is not replayed.
You're correct; my apologies. I had misplaced or misfiled your
patches, and recreated the patch to support async checksums, and I
screwed up the patch by missing this change at the end of
do_one_pass()
if (pass == PASS_SCAN) {
- info->end_transaction = next_commit_ID;
+ if (!info->end_transaction)
+ info->end_transaction = next_commit_ID;
} else {
/* It's really bad news if different passes end up at
* different places (but possible due to IO errors). */
My patch to fix the buffer head leak is still relevant, though, and
I've created a patch to reflect the error up to ext4.
> > Worse yet, no indication of any problems is
> > sent back to the ext4 filesystem code.
> This definitely is not present and needs to be incorporated.
>
I will send the patches that I've placed into the ext4 patch queue
relevant to the journal checksum code on this thread.
- Ted
--
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
