Re: udf regression: broken directory handling
On Wed 13-02-08 23:36:05, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Tuesday, 12 of February 2008, Marcin Slusarz wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 12:39:17PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > > > On Mon 11-02-08 20:13:20, Marcin Slusarz wrote: > > > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 12:09:10PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > On Sun 10-02-08 11:48:17, Marcin Slusarz wrote: > > > > > > Current mainline has a problem with reading file list. > > > > > > Simple ls prints only 2 out of 8 files on my testing DVD. > > > > > > Reverting your patch "udf: cleanup directory offset handling" > > > > > > (af793295bf9ee92660f5e77d337b0493cea3f9b9) fixes the problem. > > > > > Thanks for testing! Do you have a way to create such UDF > > > > > filesystem? For > > > > > the filesystems I've created it seems to work just fine... > > > > > > > > with patch applied: > > > > > > > > > Argh, I've submitted an old version of the patch missing changes in > > > dir.c. Below is the missing hunk. Does UDF work for you with it? > > Yes. > > Has the issue been fixed in the mainline? Andrew has the fix in his queue so it'll get to mainline soon. Honza -- Jan Kara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> SUSE Labs, CR -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: udf regression: broken directory handling
On Wed 13-02-08 23:36:05, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Tuesday, 12 of February 2008, Marcin Slusarz wrote: On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 12:39:17PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: On Mon 11-02-08 20:13:20, Marcin Slusarz wrote: On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 12:09:10PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: Hi, On Sun 10-02-08 11:48:17, Marcin Slusarz wrote: Current mainline has a problem with reading file list. Simple ls prints only 2 out of 8 files on my testing DVD. Reverting your patch udf: cleanup directory offset handling (af793295bf9ee92660f5e77d337b0493cea3f9b9) fixes the problem. Thanks for testing! Do you have a way to create such UDF filesystem? For the filesystems I've created it seems to work just fine... with patch applied: snip testing Argh, I've submitted an old version of the patch missing changes in dir.c. Below is the missing hunk. Does UDF work for you with it? Yes. Has the issue been fixed in the mainline? Andrew has the fix in his queue so it'll get to mainline soon. Honza -- Jan Kara [EMAIL PROTECTED] SUSE Labs, CR -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: udf regression: broken directory handling
On Tuesday, 12 of February 2008, Marcin Slusarz wrote: > On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 12:39:17PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > > On Mon 11-02-08 20:13:20, Marcin Slusarz wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 12:09:10PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > On Sun 10-02-08 11:48:17, Marcin Slusarz wrote: > > > > > Current mainline has a problem with reading file list. > > > > > Simple ls prints only 2 out of 8 files on my testing DVD. > > > > > Reverting your patch "udf: cleanup directory offset handling" > > > > > (af793295bf9ee92660f5e77d337b0493cea3f9b9) fixes the problem. > > > > Thanks for testing! Do you have a way to create such UDF filesystem? > > > > For > > > > the filesystems I've created it seems to work just fine... > > > > > > with patch applied: > > > > > > Argh, I've submitted an old version of the patch missing changes in > > dir.c. Below is the missing hunk. Does UDF work for you with it? > Yes. Has the issue been fixed in the mainline? Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: udf regression: broken directory handling
On Tuesday, 12 of February 2008, Marcin Slusarz wrote: On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 12:39:17PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: On Mon 11-02-08 20:13:20, Marcin Slusarz wrote: On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 12:09:10PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: Hi, On Sun 10-02-08 11:48:17, Marcin Slusarz wrote: Current mainline has a problem with reading file list. Simple ls prints only 2 out of 8 files on my testing DVD. Reverting your patch udf: cleanup directory offset handling (af793295bf9ee92660f5e77d337b0493cea3f9b9) fixes the problem. Thanks for testing! Do you have a way to create such UDF filesystem? For the filesystems I've created it seems to work just fine... with patch applied: snip testing Argh, I've submitted an old version of the patch missing changes in dir.c. Below is the missing hunk. Does UDF work for you with it? Yes. Has the issue been fixed in the mainline? Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: udf regression: broken directory handling
On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 12:39:17PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > On Mon 11-02-08 20:13:20, Marcin Slusarz wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 12:09:10PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > On Sun 10-02-08 11:48:17, Marcin Slusarz wrote: > > > > Current mainline has a problem with reading file list. > > > > Simple ls prints only 2 out of 8 files on my testing DVD. > > > > Reverting your patch "udf: cleanup directory offset handling" > > > > (af793295bf9ee92660f5e77d337b0493cea3f9b9) fixes the problem. > > > Thanks for testing! Do you have a way to create such UDF filesystem? For > > > the filesystems I've created it seems to work just fine... > > > > with patch applied: > > > Argh, I've submitted an old version of the patch missing changes in > dir.c. Below is the missing hunk. Does UDF work for you with it? Yes. Marcin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: udf regression: broken directory handling
On Mon 11-02-08 20:13:20, Marcin Slusarz wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 12:09:10PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Sun 10-02-08 11:48:17, Marcin Slusarz wrote:
> > > Current mainline has a problem with reading file list.
> > > Simple ls prints only 2 out of 8 files on my testing DVD.
> > > Reverting your patch "udf: cleanup directory offset handling"
> > > (af793295bf9ee92660f5e77d337b0493cea3f9b9) fixes the problem.
> > Thanks for testing! Do you have a way to create such UDF filesystem? For
> > the filesystems I've created it seems to work just fine...
>
> with patch applied:
Argh, I've submitted an old version of the patch missing changes in
dir.c. Below is the missing hunk. Does UDF work for you with it?
Honza
--
Jan Kara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
SUSE Labs, CR
---
Patch cleaning up UDF directory offset handling missed modifications in dir.c
(because I've submitted an old version :(). Fix it.
Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
diff --git a/fs/udf/dir.c b/fs/udf/dir.c
index 4b44e23..8d8643a 100644
--- a/fs/udf/dir.c
+++ b/fs/udf/dir.c
@@ -43,13 +43,13 @@ static int do_udf_readdir(struct inode *dir, struct file
*filp,
struct fileIdentDesc *fi = NULL;
struct fileIdentDesc cfi;
int block, iblock;
- loff_t nf_pos = filp->f_pos - 1;
+ loff_t nf_pos = (filp->f_pos - 1) << 2;
int flen;
char fname[UDF_NAME_LEN];
char *nameptr;
uint16_t liu;
uint8_t lfi;
- loff_t size = (udf_ext0_offset(dir) + dir->i_size) >> 2;
+ loff_t size = udf_ext0_offset(dir) + dir->i_size;
struct buffer_head *tmp, *bha[16];
kernel_lb_addr eloc;
uint32_t elen;
@@ -63,13 +63,13 @@ static int do_udf_readdir(struct inode *dir, struct file
*filp,
return 0;
if (nf_pos == 0)
- nf_pos = (udf_ext0_offset(dir) >> 2);
+ nf_pos = udf_ext0_offset(dir);
- fibh.soffset = fibh.eoffset = (nf_pos & ((dir->i_sb->s_blocksize - 1)
>> 2)) << 2;
+ fibh.soffset = fibh.eoffset = nf_pos & (dir->i_sb->s_blocksize - 1);
iinfo = UDF_I(dir);
if (iinfo->i_alloc_type == ICBTAG_FLAG_AD_IN_ICB) {
fibh.sbh = fibh.ebh = NULL;
- } else if (inode_bmap(dir, nf_pos >> (dir->i_sb->s_blocksize_bits - 2),
+ } else if (inode_bmap(dir, nf_pos >> dir->i_sb->s_blocksize_bits,
, , , ) ==
(EXT_RECORDED_ALLOCATED >> 30)) {
block = udf_get_lb_pblock(dir->i_sb, eloc, offset);
if ((++offset << dir->i_sb->s_blocksize_bits) < elen) {
@@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ static int do_udf_readdir(struct inode *dir, struct file
*filp,
}
while (nf_pos < size) {
- filp->f_pos = nf_pos + 1;
+ filp->f_pos = (nf_pos >> 2) + 1;
fi = udf_fileident_read(dir, _pos, , , , ,
, );
@@ -178,7 +178,7 @@ static int do_udf_readdir(struct inode *dir, struct file
*filp,
}
} /* end while */
- filp->f_pos = nf_pos + 1;
+ filp->f_pos = (nf_pos >> 2) + 1;
if (fibh.sbh != fibh.ebh)
brelse(fibh.ebh);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: udf regression: broken directory handling
On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 12:39:17PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: On Mon 11-02-08 20:13:20, Marcin Slusarz wrote: On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 12:09:10PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: Hi, On Sun 10-02-08 11:48:17, Marcin Slusarz wrote: Current mainline has a problem with reading file list. Simple ls prints only 2 out of 8 files on my testing DVD. Reverting your patch udf: cleanup directory offset handling (af793295bf9ee92660f5e77d337b0493cea3f9b9) fixes the problem. Thanks for testing! Do you have a way to create such UDF filesystem? For the filesystems I've created it seems to work just fine... with patch applied: snip testing Argh, I've submitted an old version of the patch missing changes in dir.c. Below is the missing hunk. Does UDF work for you with it? Yes. Marcin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: udf regression: broken directory handling
On Mon 11-02-08 20:13:20, Marcin Slusarz wrote:
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 12:09:10PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
Hi,
On Sun 10-02-08 11:48:17, Marcin Slusarz wrote:
Current mainline has a problem with reading file list.
Simple ls prints only 2 out of 8 files on my testing DVD.
Reverting your patch udf: cleanup directory offset handling
(af793295bf9ee92660f5e77d337b0493cea3f9b9) fixes the problem.
Thanks for testing! Do you have a way to create such UDF filesystem? For
the filesystems I've created it seems to work just fine...
with patch applied:
snip testing
Argh, I've submitted an old version of the patch missing changes in
dir.c. Below is the missing hunk. Does UDF work for you with it?
Honza
--
Jan Kara [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SUSE Labs, CR
---
Patch cleaning up UDF directory offset handling missed modifications in dir.c
(because I've submitted an old version :(). Fix it.
Signed-off-by: Jan Kara [EMAIL PROTECTED]
diff --git a/fs/udf/dir.c b/fs/udf/dir.c
index 4b44e23..8d8643a 100644
--- a/fs/udf/dir.c
+++ b/fs/udf/dir.c
@@ -43,13 +43,13 @@ static int do_udf_readdir(struct inode *dir, struct file
*filp,
struct fileIdentDesc *fi = NULL;
struct fileIdentDesc cfi;
int block, iblock;
- loff_t nf_pos = filp-f_pos - 1;
+ loff_t nf_pos = (filp-f_pos - 1) 2;
int flen;
char fname[UDF_NAME_LEN];
char *nameptr;
uint16_t liu;
uint8_t lfi;
- loff_t size = (udf_ext0_offset(dir) + dir-i_size) 2;
+ loff_t size = udf_ext0_offset(dir) + dir-i_size;
struct buffer_head *tmp, *bha[16];
kernel_lb_addr eloc;
uint32_t elen;
@@ -63,13 +63,13 @@ static int do_udf_readdir(struct inode *dir, struct file
*filp,
return 0;
if (nf_pos == 0)
- nf_pos = (udf_ext0_offset(dir) 2);
+ nf_pos = udf_ext0_offset(dir);
- fibh.soffset = fibh.eoffset = (nf_pos ((dir-i_sb-s_blocksize - 1)
2)) 2;
+ fibh.soffset = fibh.eoffset = nf_pos (dir-i_sb-s_blocksize - 1);
iinfo = UDF_I(dir);
if (iinfo-i_alloc_type == ICBTAG_FLAG_AD_IN_ICB) {
fibh.sbh = fibh.ebh = NULL;
- } else if (inode_bmap(dir, nf_pos (dir-i_sb-s_blocksize_bits - 2),
+ } else if (inode_bmap(dir, nf_pos dir-i_sb-s_blocksize_bits,
epos, eloc, elen, offset) ==
(EXT_RECORDED_ALLOCATED 30)) {
block = udf_get_lb_pblock(dir-i_sb, eloc, offset);
if ((++offset dir-i_sb-s_blocksize_bits) elen) {
@@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ static int do_udf_readdir(struct inode *dir, struct file
*filp,
}
while (nf_pos size) {
- filp-f_pos = nf_pos + 1;
+ filp-f_pos = (nf_pos 2) + 1;
fi = udf_fileident_read(dir, nf_pos, fibh, cfi, epos, eloc,
elen, offset);
@@ -178,7 +178,7 @@ static int do_udf_readdir(struct inode *dir, struct file
*filp,
}
} /* end while */
- filp-f_pos = nf_pos + 1;
+ filp-f_pos = (nf_pos 2) + 1;
if (fibh.sbh != fibh.ebh)
brelse(fibh.ebh);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: udf regression: broken directory handling
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 12:09:10PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun 10-02-08 11:48:17, Marcin Slusarz wrote: > > Current mainline has a problem with reading file list. > > Simple ls prints only 2 out of 8 files on my testing DVD. > > Reverting your patch "udf: cleanup directory offset handling" > > (af793295bf9ee92660f5e77d337b0493cea3f9b9) fixes the problem. > Thanks for testing! Do you have a way to create such UDF filesystem? For > the filesystems I've created it seems to work just fine... with patch applied: joi tmp # dd if=/dev/zero of=./test.udf count=102400 102400+0 records in 102400+0 records out 52428800 bytes (52 MB) copied, 1.08618 s, 48.3 MB/s joi tmp # mkudffs ./test.udf start=0, blocks=16, type=RESERVED start=16, blocks=3, type=VRS start=19, blocks=237, type=USPACE start=256, blocks=1, type=ANCHOR start=257, blocks=16, type=PVDS start=273, blocks=1, type=LVID start=274, blocks=25069, type=PSPACE start=25343, blocks=1, type=ANCHOR start=25344, blocks=239, type=USPACE start=25583, blocks=16, type=RVDS start=25599, blocks=1, type=ANCHOR joi tmp # mount -t udf -o loop ./test.udf ./udf/ joi tmp # cd udf/ joi udf # ls -l total 0 joi udf # touch q w e r t y u i o p joi udf # ls -l total 0 drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 40 Feb 11 19:03 lost+found -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Feb 11 20:03 q joi udf # cd ../ joi tmp # umount udf/ joi tmp # #(reverting patch) joi tmp # rmmod udf joi tmp # rm test.udf joi tmp # dd if=/dev/zero of=./test.udf count=102400 102400+0 records in 102400+0 records out 52428800 bytes (52 MB) copied, 1.0559 s, 49.7 MB/s joi tmp # mkudffs ./test.udf start=0, blocks=16, type=RESERVED start=16, blocks=3, type=VRS start=19, blocks=237, type=USPACE start=256, blocks=1, type=ANCHOR start=257, blocks=16, type=PVDS start=273, blocks=1, type=LVID start=274, blocks=25069, type=PSPACE start=25343, blocks=1, type=ANCHOR start=25344, blocks=239, type=USPACE start=25583, blocks=16, type=RVDS start=25599, blocks=1, type=ANCHOR joi tmp # mount -t udf -o loop ./test.udf ./udf/ joi tmp # cd udf/ joi udf # touch q w e r t y u i o p joi udf # ls -l total 0 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Feb 11 20:06 e -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Feb 11 20:06 i drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 40 Feb 11 19:05 lost+found -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Feb 11 20:06 o -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Feb 11 20:06 p -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Feb 11 20:06 q -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Feb 11 20:06 r -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Feb 11 20:06 t -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Feb 11 20:06 u -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Feb 11 20:06 w -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Feb 11 20:06 y joi udf # cd ../ joi tmp # umount udf/ joi tmp # #(applying patch again) joi tmp # rmmod udf joi tmp # mount -t udf -o loop ./test.udf ./udf/ joi tmp # ls -l udf/ total 0 drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 40 Feb 11 19:05 lost+found -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Feb 11 20:06 q joi tmp # -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: udf regression: broken directory handling
Hi, On Sun 10-02-08 11:48:17, Marcin Slusarz wrote: > Current mainline has a problem with reading file list. > Simple ls prints only 2 out of 8 files on my testing DVD. > Reverting your patch "udf: cleanup directory offset handling" > (af793295bf9ee92660f5e77d337b0493cea3f9b9) fixes the problem. Thanks for testing! Do you have a way to create such UDF filesystem? For the filesystems I've created it seems to work just fine... Honza -- Jan Kara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> SUSE Labs, CR -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: udf regression: broken directory handling
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 12:09:10PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: Hi, On Sun 10-02-08 11:48:17, Marcin Slusarz wrote: Current mainline has a problem with reading file list. Simple ls prints only 2 out of 8 files on my testing DVD. Reverting your patch udf: cleanup directory offset handling (af793295bf9ee92660f5e77d337b0493cea3f9b9) fixes the problem. Thanks for testing! Do you have a way to create such UDF filesystem? For the filesystems I've created it seems to work just fine... with patch applied: joi tmp # dd if=/dev/zero of=./test.udf count=102400 102400+0 records in 102400+0 records out 52428800 bytes (52 MB) copied, 1.08618 s, 48.3 MB/s joi tmp # mkudffs ./test.udf start=0, blocks=16, type=RESERVED start=16, blocks=3, type=VRS start=19, blocks=237, type=USPACE start=256, blocks=1, type=ANCHOR start=257, blocks=16, type=PVDS start=273, blocks=1, type=LVID start=274, blocks=25069, type=PSPACE start=25343, blocks=1, type=ANCHOR start=25344, blocks=239, type=USPACE start=25583, blocks=16, type=RVDS start=25599, blocks=1, type=ANCHOR joi tmp # mount -t udf -o loop ./test.udf ./udf/ joi tmp # cd udf/ joi udf # ls -l total 0 joi udf # touch q w e r t y u i o p joi udf # ls -l total 0 drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 40 Feb 11 19:03 lost+found -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Feb 11 20:03 q joi udf # cd ../ joi tmp # umount udf/ joi tmp # #(reverting patch) joi tmp # rmmod udf joi tmp # rm test.udf joi tmp # dd if=/dev/zero of=./test.udf count=102400 102400+0 records in 102400+0 records out 52428800 bytes (52 MB) copied, 1.0559 s, 49.7 MB/s joi tmp # mkudffs ./test.udf start=0, blocks=16, type=RESERVED start=16, blocks=3, type=VRS start=19, blocks=237, type=USPACE start=256, blocks=1, type=ANCHOR start=257, blocks=16, type=PVDS start=273, blocks=1, type=LVID start=274, blocks=25069, type=PSPACE start=25343, blocks=1, type=ANCHOR start=25344, blocks=239, type=USPACE start=25583, blocks=16, type=RVDS start=25599, blocks=1, type=ANCHOR joi tmp # mount -t udf -o loop ./test.udf ./udf/ joi tmp # cd udf/ joi udf # touch q w e r t y u i o p joi udf # ls -l total 0 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Feb 11 20:06 e -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Feb 11 20:06 i drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 40 Feb 11 19:05 lost+found -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Feb 11 20:06 o -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Feb 11 20:06 p -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Feb 11 20:06 q -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Feb 11 20:06 r -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Feb 11 20:06 t -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Feb 11 20:06 u -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Feb 11 20:06 w -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Feb 11 20:06 y joi udf # cd ../ joi tmp # umount udf/ joi tmp # #(applying patch again) joi tmp # rmmod udf joi tmp # mount -t udf -o loop ./test.udf ./udf/ joi tmp # ls -l udf/ total 0 drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 40 Feb 11 19:05 lost+found -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Feb 11 20:06 q joi tmp # -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: udf regression: broken directory handling
Hi, On Sun 10-02-08 11:48:17, Marcin Slusarz wrote: Current mainline has a problem with reading file list. Simple ls prints only 2 out of 8 files on my testing DVD. Reverting your patch udf: cleanup directory offset handling (af793295bf9ee92660f5e77d337b0493cea3f9b9) fixes the problem. Thanks for testing! Do you have a way to create such UDF filesystem? For the filesystems I've created it seems to work just fine... Honza -- Jan Kara [EMAIL PROTECTED] SUSE Labs, CR -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
udf regression: broken directory handling
Hi Current mainline has a problem with reading file list. Simple ls prints only 2 out of 8 files on my testing DVD. Reverting your patch "udf: cleanup directory offset handling" (af793295bf9ee92660f5e77d337b0493cea3f9b9) fixes the problem. Marcin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
udf regression: broken directory handling
Hi Current mainline has a problem with reading file list. Simple ls prints only 2 out of 8 files on my testing DVD. Reverting your patch udf: cleanup directory offset handling (af793295bf9ee92660f5e77d337b0493cea3f9b9) fixes the problem. Marcin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
