Hide Forgot
After the fix for bug #922847: e2fsprogs-1.41.12-e2fsck-overlapping-extents.patch e2fsck: detect invalid extents at the end of an extent-block e2fsck began incorrectly flagging uninitialized extents past EOF as invalid: Testcase: # for I in `seq 0 2 8`; do fallocate -o ${I}m -l 1m test/testfile ; done # fallocate -n -o 12m -l 1m test/testfile # umount test # e2fsck -fy /dev/sdb1 e2fsck 1.41.12 (17-May-2010) Pass 1: Checking inodes, blocks, and sizes Inode 12, end of extent exceeds allowed value (logical block 3072, physical block 34304, len 256) Clear? yes Inode 12, i_blocks is 12296, should be 10248. Fix? yes Pass 2: Checking directory structure Pass 3: Checking directory connectivity Pass 4: Checking reference counts Pass 5: Checking group summary information Block bitmap differences: -(34304--34559) Fix? yes Free blocks count wrong for group #1 (31059, counted=31315). Fix? yes Free blocks count wrong (669199, counted=669455). Fix? yes /dev/sdb1: ***** FILE SYSTEM WAS MODIFIED ***** /dev/sdb1: 12/174944 files (0.0% non-contiguous), 29681/699136 blocks Eric Whitney has a patch on the list to resolve this issue.
Unfortunately the same regression was pushed to z-stream, so this needs to follow it there as well.
Building in e2fsprogs-1.41.12-17.el6
Reproduced with e2fsprogs-1.41.12-15.el6 which contains the fix for bug 922847. === fsck.log === e2fsck 1.41.12 (17-May-2010) Pass 1: Checking inodes, blocks, and sizes Inode 12, end of extent exceeds allowed value (logical block 12288, physical block 20481, len 1024) Clear? no Inode 12, i_blocks is 12292, should be 10244. Fix? no Pass 2: Checking directory structure Pass 3: Checking directory connectivity Pass 4: Checking reference counts Pass 5: Checking group summary information Block bitmap differences: -(20481--21504) Fix? no /dev/loop0: ********** WARNING: Filesystem still has errors ********** /dev/loop0: 12/32768 files (8.3% non-contiguous), 15933/131072 blocks Verified with e2fsprogs-1.41.12-18.el6 Set to VERIFIED
*** Bug 985466 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2013-1689.html