Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 21 Mar 2000 16:45:59 +0000 | From | "Stephen C. Tweedie" <> | Subject | Re: patch: reiserfs for 2.3.49 |
| |
Hi,
On Sat, Mar 18, 2000 at 10:03:53PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > * Fault handling > > > > The filesystem must respond cleanly to *all* out-of-memory failures > > and media EIO errors. The response to ENOMEM may be to spin > > waiting for memory, and EIO may take the filesystem offline, but in > > either case when control returns to user space the filesystem must > > be in a known state in which all resources used by that syscall are > > released and the filesystem can be unmounted.
> >From my games with ext2-over-nbd, I know ext2 fails this test. Make > filesystem bigger than partition and watch the hell.
Working correctly in response to operator stupidity is a different thing. If your data is toasted there's a limit to what can be recovered. But in this case, did you really end up with something non-unmountable? ext2 should have complained like mad, but it shouldn't have crashed.
> > it, or whatever. There should be no combination of on-disk > > conditions which should allow fsck to crash, even though some forms > > of corruption won't let you recover much of any value! > > And notice that this is work that never ends... I found new and > wonderfull way to provoke bug in ext2fsck pretty recently (it's fixed > now).
Absolutely: these are long-term goals. ext3 development has found at least two separate bugs in e2fsprogs-1.15, for example (both now fixed).
--Stephen
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |