From: Eric Sandeen Subject: Re: [PATCH] make ext4_valid_block_bitmap() more verbose Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 10:21:12 -0600 Message-ID: <4CE15DF8.4030600@redhat.com> References: <201011130026.51268.bs_lists@aakef.fastmail.fm> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Bernd Schubert , Andreas Dilger To: Bernd Schubert Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:11169 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757684Ab0KOQVT (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Nov 2010 11:21:19 -0500 In-Reply-To: <201011130026.51268.bs_lists@aakef.fastmail.fm> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 11/12/10 5:26 PM, Bernd Schubert wrote: > The real issue we want to debug with the patch below actually came up while > stress testing Lustre using the RHEL5.5 kernel (so 2.6.32'ish ext4), but a > more verbose error function should not hurt for vanilla ext4 either. > > make ext4_valid_block_bitmap() more verbose > > While running our stress test suite, ext4_valid_block_bitmap() > frequently complains about an invalid block bitmap. > However, e2fsck does not find anything. So in oder to be able > to better debug this issue, make the function more verbose and > let it complain about the two possible invalid bitmaps. Making a raw e2image of the problematic filesystem would let us take a look at why e2fsck isn't finding problems; unless you plan to fix that yourself as well, which is just fine of course. :) -Eric > Signed-off-by: Bernd Schubert