http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14354 --- Comment #155 from Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx> 2009-10-30 13:54:35 --- Theodore Tso wrote: > On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 04:38:57PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> I've been running my testcase, and I just hit the usual corruption with >> this patch in place after 8 iterations, I'm afraid. > > Eric, since you have a relatively controllable reproduction case, have > you tried reproducing Alexey's bisection results? Specifically he > seemed to find that commit fe188c0e shows no problem, and commit > 91ac6f43 is the first commit with problems? I can try it but I have very little faith in that result to be honest. > Having to do multiple iterations will make doing a bisection a major > pain, but maybe we'll get something out of that. Well I've been doing bisects but I'm getting skeptical of the results; either my testcase isn't reliable enough or all the merges are confusing git-bisect (?) Anyway it keeps ending up on nonsensical commits. > Other things that might be worth doing given that you have a test case > would be to try reverting commit 91ac6f43, and see if that helps, and > to try this patch: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=23468 > > Or have you tried some of these experiments already? > > Regards, > > - Ted After talking to Aneesh last night, I think other good spot-checks will be to revert 487caeef9fc08c0565e082c40a8aaf58dad92bbb, and to test Jan's sync patches. -Eric -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching the assignee of the bug.-- 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
