Re: JFS resize=0 problem in 2.6.0

From: Christophe Saout (christophe_at_saout.de)
Date: 01/02/04

  • Next message: Christophe Saout: "Re: JFS resize=0 problem in 2.6.0"
    To: Mike Fedyk <mfedyk@matchmail.com>
    Date:	Fri, 02 Jan 2004 23:28:45 +0100
    
    

    Am Fr, den 02.01.2004 schrieb Mike Fedyk um 22:24:

    > I would be careful of DM and MD RAID in 2.6.0. There are some bugs flying
    > around mentioning XFS->DM->MD RAID, , but also reproducable with Ext3->DM.
    >
    > So if you're using DM, you might want to do some extra consistancy checks in
    > your tests, and don't use it with important data.

    Only DM or DM->RAID? There is one bug on bugzilla mentioning XFS
    problems on a >2TB LVM volume dating back to 2.5.73. DM uses sector_t
    everywhere, so perhaps it might be a different problem.

    DM has a workaround included since one of the later test kernels so that
    it should not break on top of the raid code. Also someone posted
    bugfixes not too long ago that fixed some hard to trigger bugs with
    bi_idx not always starting at zero (which should have affected raid and
    dm code under rare circumstances). These bugfixes are in 2.6.1-pre1 I
    think.

    There is also one bug that isn't fixed in 2.6.0 (but in the -mm kernels
    for some time and also in 2.6.1-pre1), it concerns online resizing of
    mounted filesystems.

    At least I think the core DM code should be safe under normal usage. I
    bombed it with all kinds of BIOs, not only the page sized ones most
    filesystems and swap code create, using an IDE disk. I'm using it on all
    my systems for a long time now.

    Elliot's problem is a different though, the jfs option parser doesn't do
    what he wants. ;)

    -
    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/


  • Next message: Christophe Saout: "Re: JFS resize=0 problem in 2.6.0"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: RFD: Kernel release numbering
      ... applied, because they are bugfixes, then make another rc before going live. ... kernel won't know it, there will be confusion, etc. ... Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: Linux 2.4 future
      ... bugfixes, features? ... the help of autofs list inhabitants for initail testing in the next few ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: Linux 2.6.9-rc1
      ... > any ordering wrt the bugfixes), so either interdiffs or whole new full ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: 2.4.27: md RAID1 oops on alpha revisited
      ... > The problem seems to be in qlogic isp1020 driver, not in the RAID code. ... So if it was a RAID1 bug, ... it does not affect RAID5. ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: [PATCH] broken bitmap_parse for ncpus > 32
      ... > Bugfixes are always good. ... Maybe the kerneldoc stuff would be a good idea ... and the rest of the non-static functions ppl might ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
      (Linux-Kernel)