Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 5 Feb 2003 13:36:31 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 5 Feb 2003 13:36:31 -0500 Received: from [195.223.140.107] ([195.223.140.107]:18816 "EHLO athlon.random") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 5 Feb 2003 13:36:28 -0500 Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2003 19:45:35 +0100 From: Andrea Arcangeli To: Andrew Morton Cc: lm@bitmover.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.5 changeset 1.952.4.2 corrupt in fs/jfs/inode.c Message-ID: <20030205184535.GG19678@dualathlon.random> References: <20030205174021.GE19678@dualathlon.random> <20030205102308.68899bc3.akpm@digeo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030205102308.68899bc3.akpm@digeo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-GPG-Key: 1024D/68B9CB43 X-PGP-Key: 1024R/CB4660B9 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1841 Lines: 46 On Wed, Feb 05, 2003 at 10:23:08AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > > > void jfs_truncate(struct inode *ip) > > { > > - jFYI(1, ("jfs_truncate: size = 0x%lx\n", (ulong) ip->i_size)); > > + jfs_info("jfs_truncate: size = 0x%lx", (ulong) ip->i_size); > > > > nobh_truncate_page(ip->i_mapping, ip->i_size); > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > This is the correct version. Since 2.5.59, jfs was switched over to not use > buffer_heads. In this context I don't mind which is the correct one. I only would like to know what is supposed to be stored inside the 2.5.59 tarball on kernel.org and what is supposed to be changed between 2.5.59 and the 1.952.4.2 changeset. The one I see in 2.5.59 (I double checked the tar.gz) is this: void jfs_truncate(struct inode *ip) { jFYI(1, ("jfs_truncate: size = 0x%lx\n", (ulong) ip->i_size)); block_truncate_page(ip->i_mapping, ip->i_size, jfs_get_block); And I see no changes in this area starting from 2.5.59, until changeset 1.952.4.2. So I deduce my software is right and that either the 2.5.59 tarball or the 1.952.4.2 changeset are corrupt. I can't yet fetch a full tree out of bitkepper yet (you know the network protocol must be reverse engeneered first), I can only fetch incrementals with metadata and raw patch so far because this is the thing I care about most, after I've all the changesets in live form in my db I don't mind too much about the ability to checkout a the whole tree too, since I can do the same starting from my open db rather than using the proprietary one. Andrea - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/