On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 12:05:14AM +0200, Alfredo Ferrari wrote: > Seriously, I believe this is a big issue. Let me summarize: > > a) there was a kernel update for FC5 > b) this kernel has a known bug which could results in corrupting > ext3 filesystems with 1k block size under heavy load it doesn't corrupt filesystems, it crashes instantly when the bug is hit. > c) ... nevertheless it has been pushed out with no special warning > d) pratically all /boot partitions are ext3 1k (anaconda generated) > e) many partitions on old machine upgraded from previous versions are > ext3 1k as well /boot partitions don't see anywhere near the sustained IO that is needed to hit this bug. it takes _hours_ of insane amounts of IO to hit it. It should be noted that I was the only person to ever see this. No bugzilla reports. No upstream reports. This is a real corner case scenario, as usually filesystems that see that kind of IO want the higher throughput that a larger blocksize brings. > What was the rationale for releasing an official kernel update under such > dangerous conditions? Just "anaconda doesn't generate 1k partitions (not > true BTW)"? I still believe Linux is not (yet) Windows and if features are > in the system (like 1k blocksize partitions) people can use them if > they feel appropriate and they must work. Or perhaps there was a rush to > push this 2.6.18 kernel out to get some extra guinea pigs finding all > residual bugs? But this could be fair for the FC6 betas, not for FC5 where > people is expecting reasonable stability, anyway no life-threatening > issue like a (known) filesystem corruption bug. That code hasn't changed in months, so the 2.6.17 kernel in FC5 likely was already affected by the same bug, and yet despite this, no-one was hitting it because of the pathalogical circumstances needed to hit it. > Now how long do we have to wait before we have an update for FC5 fixing > this critical issue? Or do we have to manually rollback kernels on all > machines? I'm already working on the next update. Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
