Re: [Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH] Revert "writeback: limitwrite_cache_pages integrity scanning to current EOF"

From: Joel Becker
Date: Tue Jun 29 2010 - 04:17:15 EST

On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 07:20:33PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> I dunno. Filesystem corruption makes me nervous. So I'm certainly
> totally willing to do the revert if that makes ocfs2 work again. Even
> if "work again" happens to be partly by mistake, and for some reason
> that isn't obvious.

Filesystem corruption makes me more than nervous. I'm quite
devastated by this.

> Your call, I guess. If any ocfs2 fix looks scary, and you'd prefer to
> have an -rc4 (in a few days - not today) with just the revert, I'm ok
> with that. Even if it's only a "at least no worse than 2.6.34"
> situation rather than a real fix.

I've checked both before this patch and with the patch reverted.
We corrupt in both cases. The problem is our assumption about zeroing
past i_size. The revert will fix our BUG_ON, but not the corruption.
Mark and I have ideas on how to fix the actual bug, but they
will take some time and especially testing. We also have some
shorter-term ideas on how to paper over the issue. We have to have to
have this fixed by .35.
If -rc4 isn't coming for a couple of days, can we hold off on
the decision until we get a chance to think about a paper-over solution
for it? Then we can avoid the revert.



You can use a screwdriver to screw in screws or to clean your ears,
however, the latter needs real skill, determination and a lack of fear
of injuring yourself. It is much the same with JavaScript.
- Chris Heilmann

Joel Becker
Consulting Software Developer
E-mail: joel.becker@xxxxxxxxxx
Phone: (650) 506-8127
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at