Re: [Danger] Re: test8-pre4: innd fixed?

From: Alexander Viro (
Date: Tue Sep 05 2000 - 06:46:55 EST

On Tue, 5 Sep 2000, Simon Kirby wrote:

> I just upgraded to test8pre4 from test7 and was reading this and some
> other emails with mutt. Upon quiting mutt, mutt reported that there was
> some sort of error while attempting to write the folder. My folder now
> looks like this:
> <1073152 bytes of the start of original folder>

What block size do you have? If it's 2Kb, then we've got direct blocks
preserved, indirect block - too.

> <67045376 bytes of NULL (0x00)>
> <51704 bytes of the end of the original folder>

32737 blocks blown away. That is, 63 pointers in double indirect - zeroed,
481 pointer in the 64th indirect - zeroed, 26 pointers - preserved, the
rest - zeroed, size - unchanged. WTF?

The last part (size) looks especially odd - ext2_truncate() would not be
even called before the ->i_size was set.

> Obviously, the folder was in need of some pruning to begin with, but this
> pruned a bit more than I would have liked.
> I'm not exactly sure how this happened, but it definitely didn't happen
> before with test7.

Some other POS happens with -test7 & mutt...

<thinks> I can see it happening in one scenario: out of space while trying
to do sparse write into mailbox. But this (12+512)*2048 really smells like
fs bug.

I'll try to reproduce this sucker...

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Sep 07 2000 - 21:00:22 EST