Alan Cox wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-11-26 at 21:07, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
>>So, I finally braved it and tried running 2.5.49 on my workstation to
>>test out my RAID-6 patches. There were no patches outside the md
>>area, and the ordinary filesystems aren't on md drives.
>>
>>The two SCSI drives (SymBIOS controller) work just fine, but I have
>>gotten repeated, severe data corruption on the one ATA drive in the
>>system after only a few hours of operation.
>
>
> If you mash the innards of the page cache you'll get corruption
> everywhere, its one of the charms of testing out that area of the code
> on Linux. You might want to debug using 2.5.49 user mode linux rather
> than on raw disks. Its so much easier to use "cp" to generate a
> replacement root_fs 8)
>
Yes, that's true. However, the heavily used two SCSI disks saw no
corruption whatsoever, whereas the single, lightly used ATA disk saw
heavy corruption; if it was due to experimental unrelated code one would
have expected corruption everywhere. This does not mean that it is not
my fault (as far as UML is concerned, I tried building it quite a few
times before giving up), but given the severity of the corruption I was
seeing I thought I'd raise a red flag.
-hpa
-
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 : Sat Nov 30 2002 - 22:00:15 EST