Greetings everyone,
I'm afraid that try as I may, I couldn't reproduce Kris's symptoms.
This is with 2.4.18pre7aa1, No HIGHMEM, Plus a patch from _Andreas
Dilger_ (appended below), e2fsprogs 1.25, single IDE disk. Everything
works as expected.
Alexander Viro wrote:
> WTF??? Very interesting... What about kernel messages? It looks like
> stat(2) failing.
> Just in case - could you put the same find before the second attempt of
> mount?
Did that. Still No Problem. Gentlemen, this is a low end (real) IBM
machine with 64 MB SDRAM, 333 MHz Celeron (pre-Coppermine), 128 kb L2
cache (16 kb (*2?) L1), on sloooow vesafb, in X, while compiling
gcc-3.0.3 for C only :)
(I even did away with the umounts after the first runs were
successful... then just kept mounting over and over on the same
directory.) I'm afraid I can't test with plain 2.4.18-pre7 or anything
else as this is the only 2.4 kernel I have, and Kris did say the faults
were not reproducible on 2.2. Everything was done as root.
My Script:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
#!/bin/bash
DEVICE=./loopdev
MOUNT=/mnt/tmp
# umount $MOUNT
dd if=/dev/zero of=$DEVICE bs=1k count=1000
mke2fs -v -F $DEVICE
# rm -rf $MOUNT
# mkdir -p $MOUNT
mount -v -t ext2 -o loop $DEVICE $MOUNT
cp -vr /bin/tar $MOUNT
cp -vr /bin/zcat $MOUNT
#sleep 5
#sync
find $MOUNT -ls
mount -t ext2 -o loop $DEVICE $MOUNT
find $MOUNT -ls
# umount $MOUNT
# umount $MOUNT
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Andreas's patch (adopted for 2.4.1[78])
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ BEGIN PATCH
--- linux/fs/ext2/super.c Mon Jan 28 14:10:16 2002
+++ linux/fs/ext2/super.c.mod Mon Jan 28 13:41:06 2002
@@ -286,14 +286,14 @@ static int ext2_setup_super (struct supe
struct ext2_super_block * es,
int read_only)
{
- int res = 0;
+ if (read_only)
+ return 0;
if (le32_to_cpu(es->s_rev_level) > EXT2_MAX_SUPP_REV) {
printk ("EXT2-fs warning: revision level too high, "
"forcing read-only mode\n");
- res = MS_RDONLY;
+ sb->s_flags |= MS_RDONLY;
+ return MS_RDONLY;
}
- if (read_only)
- return res;
if (!(sb->u.ext2_sb.s_mount_state & EXT2_VALID_FS))
printk ("EXT2-fs warning: mounting unchecked fs, "
"running e2fsck is recommended\n");
@@ -328,7 +328,7 @@ static int ext2_setup_super (struct supe
ext2_check_inodes_bitmap (sb);
}
#endif
- return res;
+ return 0;
}
static int ext2_check_descriptors (struct super_block * sb)
@@ -751,8 +751,9 @@ int ext2_remount (struct super_block * s
* by e2fsck since we originally mounted the partition.)
*/
sb->u.ext2_sb.s_mount_state = le16_to_cpu(es->s_state);
- if (!ext2_setup_super (sb, es, 0))
- sb->s_flags &= ~MS_RDONLY;
+ if (ext2_setup_super (sb, es, 0))
+ return -EROFS;
+ sb->s_flags &= ~MS_RDONLY;
}
ext2_sync_super(sb, es);
return 0;
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ END PATCH
Hope this helps...
Cheerio!
alvin
~~~~
We build a virtual shell around us to keep away the sorrows of life.
Most of us are very good at it... Those who aren't good enough, become
saints.
.
-
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 : Thu Jan 31 2002 - 21:01:34 EST