Bug 289711
Summary: | Filesystem corruption in kernel-2.6.22.5-76.fc7.x86_64 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Ashish Shukla <wahjava> | ||||
Component: | kernel | Assignee: | Eric Sandeen <esandeen> | ||||
Status: | CLOSED DUPLICATE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> | ||||
Severity: | low | Docs Contact: | |||||
Priority: | medium | ||||||
Version: | 7 | CC: | cebbert, davej | ||||
Target Milestone: | --- | ||||||
Target Release: | --- | ||||||
Hardware: | x86_64 | ||||||
OS: | Linux | ||||||
Whiteboard: | |||||||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |||||
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |||||
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||||||
Last Closed: | 2007-09-17 19:48:01 UTC | Type: | --- | ||||
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- | ||||
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |||||
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |||||
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |||||
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |||||
Embargoed: | |||||||
Attachments: |
|
Description
Ashish Shukla
2007-09-13 18:28:09 UTC
Created attachment 194921 [details]
Current output of 'dmesg'
Has the fs been repaired yet? could you make an e2image of it if not? I'm chasing a somewhat similar corruption at the moment, though slightly different style of htree-format problems from the reproducer I have... -Eric I've repaired my fs :(, as this is my production fs. Ashish, I understand... any chance you have logs from the e2fsck still? Thanks, -Eric I've not explicitly redirected output of fsck anywhere, but if it implicitly logs somewhere, please tell me, I'll upload that log. No, it doesn't. That's ok, just looking for clues. I'm chasing one case I can reproduce where a newly-split leaf block does not contain enough space for the new directory entry... your message: bad entry in directory #6215940: rec_len is too small for name_len - offset=19556, inode=14745838, rec_len=220, name_len=213 looks a like it might be related. Based on the long filename you were trying to rename, I'm going to assume for now that this is a dup. There's not really any other info to go on, I'm afraid. I sent this upstream today: http://marc.info/?l=linux-ext4&m=119005010917843&w=2 I tested it with the testcase at: http://marc.info/?l=linux-ext4&m=118067140512836&w=2 -Eric *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 286501 *** |