On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 12:42:58PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > Some final testing luckily caught a bug in your patch. I'll fix it > up, but for future reference, it's important to check to see if the > handle is valid (i.e., we are not in no-journal mode) before using any > of the journalling functions. Otherwise, you will crash if you try > using the code path when the file system does not have a journal. > > BTW, I would strongly recommend using the automated regression test > system found at: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/ext2/xfstests-bld.git > > It finds these sorts of problems very quickly. After you build a > kernel, running "kvm-xfstests -g quick" would have found the problem > very quickly. The fastest reproducer for the bug that I found is: > "kvm-xfstests -c nojournal shared/001". Hi Ted, If you check the xfstests commit history, I think you'll find that Namjae wrote the xfstests that triggered the failure you are seeing. You're just testing more esoteric configurations than most people do - same as I do for XFS. We can't expect every developer to test their code on every possible configuration before they submit it.... ;) Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- 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
