https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=201259 --- Comment #9 from Zorro Lang (zlang@xxxxxxxxxx) --- (In reply to Eric Sandeen from comment #8) > Zorro, I see that your new report is using a smaller blocksize (-b 1024) - > was that used in the initial report? No, smaller blocksize is not necessary (I just forgot remove that line after another testing:). Both 1024 or 4096 blocksize can reproduce this bug. Thanks, Zorro -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching the assignee of the bug.
