From: Theodore Ts'o Subject: Re: ext4: journal has aborted Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2014 11:58:12 -0400 Message-ID: <20140701155812.GD2775@thunk.org> References: <20140701082619.1ac77f1d@archvile> <20140701084206.GG9743@birch.djwong.org> <53B2A47F.90903@samsung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" , Matteo Croce , David Jander , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org To: Jaehoon Chung Return-path: Received: from imap.thunk.org ([74.207.234.97]:39173 "EHLO imap.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755467AbaGAP60 (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Jul 2014 11:58:26 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <53B2A47F.90903@samsung.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 09:07:27PM +0900, Jaehoon Chung wrote: > Hi, > > i have interesting for this problem..Because i also found the same problem.. > Is it Journal problem? > > I used the Linux version 3.16.0-rc3. > > [ 3.866449] EXT4-fs error (device mmcblk0p13): ext4_mb_generate_buddy:756: group 0, 20490 clusters in bitmap, 20488 in gd; block bitmap corrupt. > [ 3.877937] Aborting journal on device mmcblk0p13-8. > [ 3.885025] Kernel panic - not syncing: EXT4-fs (device mmcblk0p13): panic forced after error This message means that the file system has detected an inconsistency --- specifically, that the number of blocks marked as in use in the allocation bbitmap is different from what is in the block group descriptors. The file system has been marked to force a panic after an error, at which point e2fsck will be able to repair the inconsistency. What's not clear is *how* the why this happened. It can happen simply because of a hardware problem. (In particular, not all mmc flash devices handle power failures gracefully.) Or it could be a cosmic, ray, or it might be a kernel bug. Normally I would chalk this up to a hardware bug, bug it's possible that it is a kernel bug. If people can reliably reproduce the problem where no power failures or other unclean shutdowns were involved (since the last time file system has been checked using e2fsck) then that would be realy interesting. We should probably also change the message so the message is a bit more understanding to people who aren't ext4 developers. - Ted