From: tytso@mit.edu Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] fix type of "offset" in ext4_io_end Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 08:37:51 -0500 Message-ID: <20100205133751.GO25885@thunk.org> References: <4B6327C4.4000100@redhat.com> <4B6344E7.9050503@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: ext4 development , fmayhar@google.com, Giel de Nijs To: Eric Sandeen Return-path: Received: from thunk.org ([69.25.196.29]:53591 "EHLO thunker.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756001Ab0BENhy (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Feb 2010 08:37:54 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4B6344E7.9050503@redhat.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 02:28:23PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > The "offset" member in ext4_io_end holds bytes, not > blocks, so ext4_lblk_t is wrong - and too small (u32) > > This caused the testcase "Possible ext4 data corruption > with large files and async I/O" sent by Giel to fail when it > wrapped around to 0. > > Also fix up the type of arguments to > ext4_convert_unwritten_extents(), it gets ssize_t from > ext4_end_aio_dio_nolock() and ext4_ext_direct_IO() > > Reported-by: Giel de Nijs > Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen So I was going to submit this patch to Linus, but the last two times I've run xfsqa ("xfsqa -g quick" and "xfsqa -g auto"), test #126 has failed. If I run the test stand-alone, it passes. It's a bit of a head-scratcher. I'm currently backing out the patch and trying to do an xfsqa -g auto run to make sure this was something that had crept in before applying this patch, so this may very well not be this patch --- I certainly can't see anything wrong with it. But I thought I would give a heads up.... - Ted