On 8/23/13 12:57 PM, Victor Leschuk wrote: > Damn gmx.com, can't manage to make it use TEXT/PLAIN. Jeff, sorry for spamming. > > Resending original message from gmail... > > Hello, > > We have met a situation when reiserfsck segfaulted on one of our > partitions. I have performed a small research and the cause appeared > to be wrong detection of transaction count. > > Our FS had only one journal transaction, however trans_count which was > passed to progbar_update() as maximum transaction value was detected > as (last_transaction - first_transaction) which in our case was 0. > Thus progbar_update() resulted in segmentation fault: > > (gdb) bt > #0 0xb7610b7c in vfprintf () from /lib/i386-linux-gnu/i686/cmov/libc.so.6 > #1 0xb7611bb2 in ?? () from /lib/i386-linux-gnu/i686/cmov/libc.so.6 > #2 0xb760cdc3 in vfprintf () from /lib/i386-linux-gnu/i686/cmov/libc.so.6 > #3 0xb7616e4f in fprintf () from /lib/i386-linux-gnu/i686/cmov/libc.so.6 > #4 0x08088aca in progbar_update (ctx=0xbfef0020, label=0x8096650 > "Replaying journal", curr=1, max=0, dpynum=1) at progbar.c:80 > #5 0x080843c4 in replay_journal (fs=0x9492980) at journal.c:868 > #6 0x0804ae67 in reiserfsck_replay_journal (fs=0x9492980) at main.c:727 > #7 0x0804b477 in prepare_fs_for_check (fs=0x9492980) at main.c:838 > #8 0x0804c0c8 in check_fs (fs=0x9492980) at main.c:1100 > #9 0x0804cfb0 in main (argc=3, argv=0xbfef0254) at main.c:1380 > > Here is part of debugreiserfs -j output > > Journal header (block #8210 of ./partition.bug): > j_last_flush_trans_id 0 > j_first_unflushed_offset 0 > j_mount_id 10 > Device [0x0] > Magic [0x4f0a099e] > Size 8193 blocks (including 1 for journal header) (first block 18) > Max transaction length 1024 blocks > Max batch size 900 blocks > Max commit age 30 > Mountid 10, transid 10, desc 18, length 2, commit 21 > #0 19->16 20->8211 < ========================= this is the only record > > I successfully reproduced it on versions 3.6.21 (which we were using) > and 3.6.23 (which I believe is the latest). > > Attaching patch. Let me know your opinion. If I am wrong, please > comment, if I am correct, feel free to include patch into sources. Thanks for the report and patch. I've applied it to my repo (adding your Signed-off-by, per the line immediately quoted above) and it'll be part of 3.6.24. -Jeff -- Jeff Mahoney SUSE Labs
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
