On Sep 24, 2001 14:15 -0700, Ryan Mack wrote:
> It seems that the aforementioned changes in 2.4.10 has prevented the root
> filesystem from having its superblock updated as dirty. It may be my
> imagination, but since the root fs is already mounted ro when it's
> remounted rw, the superblock isn't being updated with the needs_recovery
OK, it's not exactly clear what you are referring to, but:
1) On ext3 the superblock is NEVER marked dirty, because of the journal.
As long as the journal is running normally, the filesystem will always
2) There should _not_ be a problem with the needs_recovery flag being set
from within the kernel. HOWEVER, attempts to read it from user-space
may fail because of a disconnect between the buffer cache and the page
Now that these issues are in the open (and already being discussed) they
will likely be fixed in a relatively short timeframe.
-- 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 email@example.com 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 : Sun Sep 30 2001 - 21:00:26 EST