status of the ext3/jbd error handling enhancement patches
Hi Andrew,
Thank you for pushing my ext3/jbd to Linus. But some of patches in -mm (following three patches) haven't been sent to Linus.
#jbd-fix-error-handling-for-checkpoint-io.patch: double-check this jbd-fix-error-handling-for-checkpoint-io.patch ext3-add-checks-for-errors-from-jbd.patch jbd-test-bh_write_eio-to-detect-errors-on-metadata-buffers.patch
They improve filesystem corruption problem and it is needed by mission critical systems.
Could you tell me what is your concern (you commented, "double-check this") ? Are there something that I can help? For example, I can provide some SystemTap scripts to help tests.
Thank you,
Signature · 3 lines
Hidehiro Kawai Hitachi, Systems Development Laboratory Linux Technology Center
Quoted 10 lines · On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 13:25:01 +0900 Hidehiro Kawai…
Hi Andrew,
Thank you for pushing my ext3/jbd to Linus. But some of patches in -mm (following three patches) haven't been sent to Linus.
#jbd-fix-error-handling-for-checkpoint-io.patch: double-check this jbd-fix-error-handling-for-checkpoint-io.patch ext3-add-checks-for-errors-from-jbd.patch jbd-test-bh_write_eio-to-detect-errors-on-metadata-buffers.patch
Quoted 6 lines
They improve filesystem corruption problem and it is needed by mission critical systems.
Could you tell me what is your concern (you commented, "double-check this") ? Are there something that I can help? For example, I can provide some SystemTap scripts to help tests.
I forget my reasons for that - would need to go back and review the discussions when the patch was first merged.
One of the above patches (I forget which) breaks the build because it expects the presence of Al Viro's VFS tree, and that hasn't been merged yet. I need to wait and see if that merge will be happening (seems unlikely) and if not, rework the patch against mainline.
Quie a few patches (5%?) tend to get delayed like this due to missing dependencies.
Quoted 12 lines · Andrew Morton
Quoted 11 lines
#jbd-fix-error-handling-for-checkpoint-io.patch: double-check this jbd-fix-error-handling-for-checkpoint-io.patch ext3-add-checks-for-errors-from-jbd.patch jbd-test-bh_write_eio-to-detect-errors-on-metadata-buffers.patch
They improve filesystem corruption problem and it is needed by mission critical systems.
Could you tell me what is your concern (you commented, "double-check this") ? Are there something that I can help? For example, I can provide some SystemTap scripts to help tests.
Quoted 7 lines
I forget my reasons for that - would need to go back and review the discussions when the patch was first merged.
One of the above patches (I forget which) breaks the build because it expects the presence of Al Viro's VFS tree, and that hasn't been merged yet. I need to wait and see if that merge will be happening (seems unlikely) and if not, rework the patch against mainline.
Strange; I don't recall any of the ext4 variants of the error handling patches requiring Al's VFS tree. And I thought all of them have been merged into Linus's tree at this point.
Kawai-san, could you double check and see if I processed all of your patches and pushed them to Linus? I was pretty sure I had...
- Ted
Quoted 14 lines · Theodore Tso
Quoted 12 lines · Andrew Morton
Quoted 11 lines
#jbd-fix-error-handling-for-checkpoint-io.patch: double-check this jbd-fix-error-handling-for-checkpoint-io.patch ext3-add-checks-for-errors-from-jbd.patch jbd-test-bh_write_eio-to-detect-errors-on-metadata-buffers.patch
They improve filesystem corruption problem and it is needed by mission critical systems.
Could you tell me what is your concern (you commented, "double-check this") ? Are there something that I can help? For example, I can provide some SystemTap scripts to help tests.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 7 lines
I forget my reasons for that - would need to go back and review the discussions when the patch was first merged.
One of the above patches (I forget which) breaks the build because it expects the presence of Al Viro's VFS tree, and that hasn't been merged yet. I need to wait and see if that merge will be happening (seems unlikely) and if not, rework the patch against mainline.
I see. Thank you for your work.
Quoted 3 lines
Strange; I don't recall any of the ext4 variants of the error handling patches requiring Al's VFS tree. And I thought all of them have been merged into Linus's tree at this point.
I checked Al's VFS tree and I found commit 6ac465f99b29f74ca5a62bc32a8772985d9a071b changes codes near where one of my patch changes (in ext3/ext4_quota_on()), but not the same code.
Quoted 2 lines
Kawai-san, could you double check and see if I processed all of your patches and pushed them to Linus? I was pretty sure I had...
I confirmed that all of my ext4/jbd2 patches have been merged into mainline. Thank you very much!
Regards,
Signature · 3 lines
Hidehiro Kawai Hitachi, Systems Development Laboratory Linux Technology Center
Quoted 7 lines · On Tue, 21 Oct 2008 15:24:47 +0900 Hidehiro Kawai…
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 4 lines
One of the above patches (I forget which) breaks the build because it expects the presence of Al Viro's VFS tree, and that hasn't been merged yet. I need to wait and see if that merge will be happening (seems unlikely) and if not, rework the patch against mainline.
I see. Thank you for your work.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Strange; I don't recall any of the ext4 variants of the error handling patches requiring Al's VFS tree. And I thought all of them have been merged into Linus's tree at this point.
I checked Al's VFS tree and I found commit
6ac465f99b29f74ca5a62bc32a8772985d9a071bchanges codes near where one of my patch changes (in ext3/ext4_quota_on()), but not the same code.
OK.
Don't worry about it - I'll fix things up some time this week.
Quoted 5 lines · Hidehiro Kawai
Hi Andrew,
Thank you for pushing my ext3/jbd to Linus. But some of patches in -mm (following three patches) haven't been sent to Linus.
Quoted 7 lines
#jbd-fix-error-handling-for-checkpoint-io.patch: double-check this jbd-fix-error-handling-for-checkpoint-io.patch ext3-add-checks-for-errors-from-jbd.patch jbd-test-bh_write_eio-to-detect-errors-on-metadata-buffers.patch
They improve filesystem corruption problem and it is needed by mission critical systems.
Hi Hidehiro,
It seems you have been looking the code behind the problems I reported (see linux-ext4 post "EXT3 way too happy with write errors", October 14th).
Are you aware of any patches that look at failed writes outside of JBD also not noticing write errors? It seems that not all write errors are causing EXT3 to take the action of aborting the journal, which seems to be a very bad idea (an example in my previous posting, testing with fault injection).
Anyway, I would be very happy to test out any patches in this area, and if none exist, I will try to track down why it is ignoring some of these errors.
Thanks,
Simon-
Hi Simon,
Quoted 11 lines · Simon Kirby
Hi Hidehiro,
It seems you have been looking the code behind the problems I reported (see linux-ext4 post "EXT3 way too happy with write errors", October 14th).
Are you aware of any patches that look at failed writes outside of JBD also not noticing write errors? It seems that not all write errors are causing EXT3 to take the action of aborting the journal, which seems to be a very bad idea (an example in my previous posting, testing with fault injection).
Which kernel did you use for testing? If you use the latest -mm kernel (2.6.27-rc5-mm1) with a patch at http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/mmotm/broken-out/jbd-test-bh_write_eio-to-detect-errors-on-metadata-buffers.patch, most of this kind of problems may be solved. But some additional works are still needed; nobody checks I/O error on updating a journal super block.
Quoted 3 lines
Anyway, I would be very happy to test out any patches in this area, and if none exist, I will try to track down why it is ignoring some of these errors.
Thanks,
Signature · 3 lines
Hidehiro Kawai Hitachi, Systems Development Laboratory Linux Technology Center