Never underestimate yourself, Martin ;)
Thanks ;-)
Yes, those all looked like no-ops. The guilty party is ext2_new_blocks:
i386, x86_64 and ppc64 are now happily building on ext2s with this patch
below (I've been lazy, could have deleted your "E2FSBLK" addition too).
Yup, we started throwing away the error return code ;-(
But I haven't attempted to correlate it with the loops seen (with OOMs
too on the x86_64, no idea why, but they've likewise melted away with
this patch). And I'm dubious whether it's the _right_ fix: the whole
mess of ints, unsigned longs and __u32s looks tricky to me, not some-
thing to sort out in a hurry - I'm only working with small filesystems
here (looped on a tmpfs file). (And if ret_block really should be an
ext2_fsblk_t there, shouldn't ext2_new_blocks return an ext2_fsblk_t
rather than an int?)
I was trying to harmonize it with what ext3 code does, but as Andrew
understands this code a thousand times better than I, hopefully it's
all fixed properly ;-)
I see Andrew's sent me an alternative patch to try, I'll give that
a whirl now; and see if just making ext2_new_blocks return an
ext2_fsblk_t would do it too.
M.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
