Hmm, it looks like you didn't run the regression test script before submitting this patch? It looks like it's not a bug which your patch introduced, but rather, it uncovered a bug. This was a failure in the second run of f_extent_bad_node, because in the fix we didn't make sure we updated the starting block of parent node when we cleared a node in the extent tree. (see below) This brings up another question. Did you test file systems after running punch on a number of different files to make sure the e2fsck is happy withe file systems which current kernels might generate? In this particular test case, even though the logical start didn't match, it doesn't cause any problems because it's at the left-most branch of the tree. I want to make sure we aren't triggering failures for file systems where the kernel is creating which is technically incorrect, but which isn't causing problems in practice... - Ted % ./test_script f_extent_bad_node f_extent_bad_node: bad interior node in extent tree: failed --- ../../tests/f_extent_bad_node/expect.2 2012-07-06 13:37:27.316253023 +0000 +++ f_extent_bad_node.2.log 2012-11-29 13:24:11.119306973 +0000 @@ -1,7 +1,23 @@ Pass 1: Checking inodes, blocks, and sizes +Interior extent node level 0 of inode 12: +Logical start 0 does not match logical start 3 at next level. Fix? yes + +Inode 12, i_blocks is 8, should be 6. Fix? yes + Pass 2: Checking directory structure Pass 3: Checking directory connectivity Pass 4: Checking reference counts Pass 5: Checking group summary information -test_filesys: 12/16 files (0.0% non-contiguous), 25/100 blocks -Exit status is 0 +Block bitmap differences: -24 +Fix? yes + +Free blocks count wrong for group #0 (75, counted=76). +Fix? yes + +Free blocks count wrong (75, counted=76). +Fix? yes + + +test_filesys: ***** FILE SYSTEM WAS MODIFIED ***** +test_filesys: 12/16 files (0.0% non-contiguous), 24/100 blocks +Exit status is 1 125 tests succeeded 1 tests failed Tests failed: f_extent_bad_node -- 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
