LGTM.
On Thu, 2015-12-24 at 15:37 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> 3.2.75-rc1 review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me
> know.
>
> --
>
> From: David Turner
>
> commit a4dad1ae24f850410c4e60f22823cba1289b8d52 upstream.
>
> In ext4,
LGTM.
On Thu, 2015-12-24 at 15:37 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> 3.2.75-rc1 review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me
> know.
>
> --
>
> From: David Turner <nova...@novalis.org>
>
> commit a4dad1ae24f850410c4e60f22823cba12
I was running code related to the python script -- multiple threads doing
inotify things in parallel, using watchman, and I got the following Oops:
[152513.914195] watchman[4963]: segfault at 7ff04ddb09d0 ip
7ff05b831f60 sp 7ff04c5acce8 error 4 in
libpthread-2.15.so[7ff05b825000+18000]
I was running code related to the python script -- multiple threads doing
inotify things in parallel, using watchman, and I got the following Oops:
[152513.914195] watchman[4963]: segfault at 7ff04ddb09d0 ip
7ff05b831f60 sp 7ff04c5acce8 error 4 in
libpthread-2.15.so[7ff05b825000+18000]
(script attached)
On Tue, March 4, 2014 2:09 pm, David Turner wrote:
> I apologize for the slightly convoluted reproduction steps here,
> but I was not easily able to find a simpler test case in the
> time that I had available.
>
> First, you'll need Facebook's watchman:
>
(script attached)
On Tue, March 4, 2014 2:09 pm, David Turner wrote:
> I apologize for the slightly convoluted reproduction steps here,
> but I was not easily able to find a simpler test case in the
> time that I had available.
>
> First, you'll need Facebook's watchman:
>
I apologize for the slightly convoluted reproduction steps here,
but I was not easily able to find a simpler test case in the
time that I had available.
First, you'll need Facebook's watchman:
https://github.com/facebook/watchman
Build and install it. Then run the attached Python script.
After
I apologize for the slightly convoluted reproduction steps here,
but I was not easily able to find a simpler test case in the
time that I had available.
First, you'll need Facebook's watchman:
https://github.com/facebook/watchman
Build and install it. Then run the attached Python script.
After
(script attached)
On Tue, March 4, 2014 2:09 pm, David Turner wrote:
I apologize for the slightly convoluted reproduction steps here,
but I was not easily able to find a simpler test case in the
time that I had available.
First, you'll need Facebook's watchman:
https://github.com/facebook
(script attached)
On Tue, March 4, 2014 2:09 pm, David Turner wrote:
I apologize for the slightly convoluted reproduction steps here,
but I was not easily able to find a simpler test case in the
time that I had available.
First, you'll need Facebook's watchman:
https://github.com/facebook
. This patch treats those incorrectly-encoded dates as
pre-1970, instead of post-2311, until kernel 4.20 is released.
Hopefully by then e2fsck will have fixed up the bad data.
Also add a comment explaining the encoding of ext4's extra {a,c,m}time
bits.
Signed-off-by: David Turner
Reported-by: Mark
against e2fsprogs/next
--
Older kernels on 64-bit machines would incorrectly encode pre-1970
ext4 dates as post-2311 dates. Detect and correct this (assuming the
current date is before 2242).
Includes tests for this, as well as changes to debugfs to correctly
set crtimes.
Signed-off-by: David
against e2fsprogs/next
--
Older kernels on 64-bit machines would incorrectly encode pre-1970
ext4 dates as post-2311 dates. Detect and correct this (assuming the
current date is before 2242).
Includes tests for this, as well as changes to debugfs to correctly
set crtimes.
Signed-off-by: David
. This patch treats those incorrectly-encoded dates as
pre-1970, instead of post-2311, until kernel 4.20 is released.
Hopefully by then e2fsck will have fixed up the bad data.
Also add a comment explaining the encoding of ext4's extra {a,c,m}time
bits.
Signed-off-by: David Turner nova...@novalis.org
On Tue, 2014-01-21 at 22:22 -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 07:30:18PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 02:56:54AM -0500, David Turner wrote:
> > > b. Use Andreas's encoding, which is incompatible with pre-1970 files
> > >
On Tue, 2014-01-21 at 22:22 -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 07:30:18PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 02:56:54AM -0500, David Turner wrote:
b. Use Andreas's encoding, which is incompatible with pre-1970 files
written on 64-bit systems.
I
On Sat, 2013-12-07 at 19:53 -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 07, 2013 at 03:02:40PM -0500, David Turner wrote:
> >
> > However, as Andreas notes, "we want to verify .. that "debugfs -R
> > 'stat testfile'" decodes the times cor
4 dates as post-2311 dates. Detect and correct this (assuming the
current date is before 2242).
Includes tests for this, as well as changes to debugfs to correctly
set crtimes.
Signed-off-by: David Turner
---
debugfs/set_fields.c | 2 +-
e2fsck/pass1.c
-2310 dates. This is because we don't
want our filesystem debugging tools to silently correct data errors.
Signed-off-by: David Turner
---
debugfs/debugfs.c | 22 ++
debugfs/debugfs.h | 2 +-
debugfs/util.c| 7 +++
3 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 9 deletions
-2310 dates. This is because we don't
want our filesystem debugging tools to silently correct data errors.
Signed-off-by: David Turner nova...@novalis.org
---
debugfs/debugfs.c | 22 ++
debugfs/debugfs.h | 2 +-
debugfs/util.c| 7 +++
3 files changed, 22 insertions
. Detect and correct this (assuming the
current date is before 2242).
Includes tests for this, as well as changes to debugfs to correctly
set crtimes.
Signed-off-by: David Turner nova...@novalis.org
---
debugfs/set_fields.c | 2 +-
e2fsck/pass1.c| 43
On Sat, 2013-12-07 at 19:53 -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
On Sat, Dec 07, 2013 at 03:02:40PM -0500, David Turner wrote:
However, as Andreas notes, we want to verify .. that debugfs -R
'stat testfile' decodes the times correctly. Unfortunately, it
does not, and it is not trivial to fix
Is this version good, or should I make some more improvements?
On Thu, 2013-11-14 at 16:06 -0500, David Turner wrote:
> Not sure what the official subject line format is for revising only
> one of N patches, so I'm trying this one. Let me now if it is wrong.
>
> On Thu, 2013-11
Is this version good, or should I make some more improvements?
On Thu, 2013-11-14 at 16:06 -0500, David Turner wrote:
Not sure what the official subject line format is for revising only
one of N patches, so I'm trying this one. Let me now if it is wrong.
On Thu, 2013-11-14 at 02:15 -0800
ect and correct this (assuming the
current date is before 2242).
Signed-off-by: David Turner
---
e2fsck/pass1.c | 41 +
e2fsck/problem.c | 4
e2fsck/problem.h | 4
3 files changed, 49 insertions(+)
diff --git a/e2fsck/pass1.c b/e2
(apologies if this is a dup -- my mail client crashed and I don't see
this one in the lkml archives)
--
Older kernels on 64-bit machines would incorrectly encode pre-1970
ext4 dates as post-2311 dates. Detect and correct this (assuming the
current date is before 2242).
Signed-off-by: David
with 1,1 in the
extra bits. This patch treats those incorrectly-encoded dates as
pre-1970, instead of post-2311, until kernel 4.20 is released.
Hopefully by then e2fsck will have fixed up the bad data.
Signed-off-by: David Turner
Reported-by: Mark Harris
Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org
with 1,1 in the
extra bits. This patch treats those incorrectly-encoded dates as
pre-1970, instead of post-2311, until kernel 4.20 is released.
Hopefully by then e2fsck will have fixed up the bad data.
Signed-off-by: David Turner nova...@novalis.org
Reported-by: Mark Harris mh8...@yahoo.com
(apologies if this is a dup -- my mail client crashed and I don't see
this one in the lkml archives)
--
Older kernels on 64-bit machines would incorrectly encode pre-1970
ext4 dates as post-2311 dates. Detect and correct this (assuming the
current date is before 2242).
Signed-off-by: David
is before 2242).
Signed-off-by: David Turner nova...@novalis.org
---
e2fsck/pass1.c | 41 +
e2fsck/problem.c | 4
e2fsck/problem.h | 4
3 files changed, 49 insertions(+)
diff --git a/e2fsck/pass1.c b/e2fsck/pass1.c
index ab23e42..e19855f 100644
This patch is against e2fsprogs.
---
Older kernels on 64-bit machines would incorrectly encode pre-1970
ext4 dates as post-2311 dates. Detect and correct this (assuming the
current date is before 2311).
Signed-off-by: David Turner
---
e2fsck/pass1.c | 37
incorrectly-encoded dates as
pre-1970, instead of post-2311, until kernel 4.20 is released.
Hopefully by then e2fsck will have fixed up the bad data.
Signed-off-by: David Turner
Reported-by: Mark Harris
Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23732
---
fs/ext4/ext4.h | 61
On Tue, 2013-11-12 at 15:03 -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 07:30:18PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 02:56:54AM -0500, David Turner wrote:
> > > b. Use Andreas's encoding, which is incompatible with pre-1970 files
> > >
On Tue, 2013-11-12 at 15:03 -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 07:30:18PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 02:56:54AM -0500, David Turner wrote:
b. Use Andreas's encoding, which is incompatible with pre-1970 files
written on 64-bit systems.
I
incorrectly-encoded dates as
pre-1970, instead of post-2311, until kernel 4.20 is released.
Hopefully by then e2fsck will have fixed up the bad data.
Signed-off-by: David Turner nova...@novalis.org
Reported-by: Mark Harris mh8...@yahoo.com
Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id
This patch is against e2fsprogs.
---
Older kernels on 64-bit machines would incorrectly encode pre-1970
ext4 dates as post-2311 dates. Detect and correct this (assuming the
current date is before 2311).
Signed-off-by: David Turner nova...@novalis.org
---
e2fsck/pass1.c | 37
On Sat, 2013-11-09 at 15:51 -0800, Mark Harris wrote:
>
> The problem with the existing encoding is that pre-1970 dates are
> encoded with extra bits 1,1 in 64-bit kernels with ext4, but on 32-bit
> kernels and inodes that were originally written as ext3 the extra bits
> will be 0,0. Currently,
On Sat, 2013-11-09 at 15:51 -0800, Mark Harris wrote:
The problem with the existing encoding is that pre-1970 dates are
encoded with extra bits 1,1 in 64-bit kernels with ext4, but on 32-bit
kernels and inodes that were originally written as ext3 the extra bits
will be 0,0. Currently, both
On Fri, 2013-11-08 at 14:37 -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Nov 7, 2013, at 4:26 PM, David Turner wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-11-08 at 00:14 +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> >> Still unnecessary type cast here (but that's a cosmetic issue).
> > ...
> >> Otherwise
On Fri, 2013-11-08 at 14:37 -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
On Nov 7, 2013, at 4:26 PM, David Turner nova...@novalis.org wrote:
On Fri, 2013-11-08 at 00:14 +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
Still unnecessary type cast here (but that's a cosmetic issue).
...
Otherwise the patch looks good. You can add
intended. This patch corrects that issue, so that the only negative
{a,c,m}times are those between 1901 and 1970 (as per 32-bit signed
timestamps).
Signed-off-by: David Turner
Reported-by: Mark Harris
Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23732
Reviewed-by: Jan Kara
---
fs/ext4/ex
to be negative as well, which is not what's
intended. This patch corrects that issue, so that the only negative
{a,c,m}times are those between 1901 and 1970 (as per 32-bit signed
timestamps).
Signed-off-by: David Turner
Reported-by: Mark Harris
Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?i
as well, which is not what's
intended. This patch corrects that issue, so that the only negative
{a,c,m}times are those between 1901 and 1970 (as per 32-bit signed
timestamps).
Signed-off-by: David Turner nova...@novalis.org
Reported-by: Mark Harris mh8...@yahoo.com
Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org
. This patch corrects that issue, so that the only negative
{a,c,m}times are those between 1901 and 1970 (as per 32-bit signed
timestamps).
Signed-off-by: David Turner nova...@novalis.org
Reported-by: Mark Harris mh8...@yahoo.com
Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23732
Reviewed
is not what's
intended. This patch corrects that issue, so that the only negative
{a,c,m}times are those between 1901 and 1970 (as per 32-bit signed
timestamps).
Signed-off-by: David Turner
Reported-by: Mark Harris
Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23732
---
fs/ext4/ext4.h
is not what's
intended. This patch corrects that issue, so that the only negative
{a,c,m}times are those between 1901 and 1970 (as per 32-bit signed
timestamps).
Signed-off-by: David Turner nova...@novalis.org
Reported-by: Mark Harris mh8...@yahoo.com
Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org
46 matches
Mail list logo
