From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: Fw: Re: 2.6.21-rc3-mm1 Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 17:07:48 -0800 Message-ID: <20070313170748.3e0bb466.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <20070312220426.2b1d7aaa.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <45F6BDC9.8080205@redhat.com> <1173799745.9662.4.camel@kleikamp.austin.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: sandeen@redhat.com, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, astralstorm@gmail.com, kalpak@clusterfs.com To: Dave Kleikamp Return-path: Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.24]:46419 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752663AbXCNAIk (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2007 20:08:40 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1173799745.9662.4.camel@kleikamp.austin.ibm.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org > On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:29:05 -0500 Dave Kleikamp wrote: > On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 10:05 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > > And broken stuff too :-) > > > The nanoseconds patch is broken on x86_64 - makes mtimes from the future: > > > e.g. year 2431. I suspect an endianness issue. > > > x86 works fine according to my sources. > > > > > > The files themselves have correct mtimes, as booting previous kernel > > > or one w/o the nanoseconds patch works fine. > > There were later patches posted to the list after this version, I think, which > > are not yet in Ted's tree... I'll find some time today to test the "take3" version > > on x86_64, unless someone beats me to it. > > I didn't quite beat you to it, but I did make a diff to bring > 2.6.21-rc3-mm1 in tune with the "take3" patch. It makes the code easier > to understand, but I'm not sure if it contains anything to fix the bug. > Code inspection hasn't gotten me any closer to figuring out what's > wrong. > > Shaggy It's possible that I screwed up merging Ted's tree into mainline - it spat some rejects, and needs updating to 2.6.21-rc3.