Al Viro writes:
> On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 01:35:05PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > > The only remote possibility is in ext2_free_blocks() if block+count
> > > overflows a 32-bit unsigned value. Only 2 places call ext2_free_blocks()
> > > with a count != 1, and ext2_free_data() looks to be OK. The other
> > > possibility is that i_prealloc_count is bogus - that is it! Nowhere
> > > is i_prealloc_count initialized to zero AFAICS.
> > >
> > Did you ever push this to Alan and/or Linus? This looks pretty
> > important!
>
> It isn't. Check fs/inode.c::clean_inode(). Specifically,
> memset(&inode->u, 0, sizeof(inode->u));
> The thing is called both by get_empty_inode() and by get_new_inode() (the
> former - just before returning, the latter - just before calling
> ->read_inode()).
If this is the case, then all of the other zero initializations can be
removed as well. I figured that if most of the fields needed to be
zeroed, then ones _not_ being zeroed would lead to this problem.
FYI Stephen, the original poster followed up that the problem was with
an IBM SCSI RAID card...
Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger \ "If a man ate a pound of pasta and a pound of antipasto,
\ would they cancel out, leaving him still hungry?"
http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/ -- Dogbert
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 23 2001 - 21:00:19 EST