Can anyone confirm whether this has been fixed since the bug was filed?
Or whether there is still a risk of trashing the file system on ARMv5/ARMv6?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=680090
___
arm mailing list
arm@lists.fedoraproject.org
htt
On 07/07/2012 08:42 PM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
> Can anyone confirm whether this has been fixed since the bug was filed?
> Or whether there is still a risk of trashing the file system on ARMv5/ARMv6?
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=680090
I believe Eric said this was now likely fixe
On 07/09/2012 03:24 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
On 7/8/12 1:07 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
On 07/07/2012 08:42 PM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
Can anyone confirm whether this has been fixed since the bug was filed?
Or whether there is still a risk of trashing the file system on ARMv5/ARMv6?
https://bugzilla.re
On 07/09/2012 03:57 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
On 7/9/12 9:45 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
On 07/09/2012 03:24 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
On 7/8/12 1:07 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
On 07/07/2012 08:42 PM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
Can anyone confirm whether this has been fixed since the bug
was filed? Or whether t
On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 16:23 +0100, Gordan Bobic wrote:
> This issue also affects SPARC and Itanium, IIRC, likely a lot of others,
> too. It's only x86 and ARMv7+ that have transparent automatic alignment
> fixup in hardware.
On ARM https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm
2.6 kernels don't have fixups defaulting to on.
And it's a lot more expensive.
Just because there is an expensive workaround doesn't mean it's not a bug. And
arguably even with hardware fixup it's still a bug and appallingly bad practice.
Let's not sweep this under the carpet, especially in som
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 5:09 PM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
> 2.6 kernels don't have fixups defaulting to on.
I think Chris was meaning that on Fedora released kernels we've had it
defaulted to on.
> And it's a lot more expensive.
I prefect expense over corrupted filesystems or other equally not nice
s
On 7/8/12 1:07 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
> On 07/07/2012 08:42 PM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
>> Can anyone confirm whether this has been fixed since the bug was filed?
>> Or whether there is still a risk of trashing the file system on ARMv5/ARMv6?
>>
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=680090
>
On 7/9/12 9:45 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
> On 07/09/2012 03:24 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> On 7/8/12 1:07 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
>>> On 07/07/2012 08:42 PM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
Can anyone confirm whether this has been fixed since the bug
was filed? Or whether there is still a risk of trashin
On 7/9/12 11:25 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 5:09 PM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
...
>> Let's not sweep this under the carpet, especially in something as critical
>> as e2fsprogs.
>
> I'm not sure where you get the idea it's being swept under the carpet?
> There's a means of mit
On 07/09/2012 05:25 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>> And it's a lot more expensive.
>
> I prefect expense over corrupted filesystems or other equally not nice
> situations.
I prefer a well written program that doesn't require expensive bodges to
keep my data safe. What's your point?
>> Just becau
On Mon, 9 Jul 2012, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 7/9/12 9:45 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
>
> > [...]
>
> Maybe I should know, but what happens on < ARMv7+ ? Memory corruption?
> If so I'm surprised that extN doesn't fall down all over the place today.
From ARMv6 and above, "simple" unaligned accesses
On 07/09/2012 05:27 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
On 7/9/12 11:25 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 5:09 PM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
...
Let's not sweep this under the carpet, especially in something as critical as
e2fsprogs.
I'm not sure where you get the idea it's being swept unde
On 7/9/12 1:03 PM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
> On 07/09/2012 05:25 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>
>>> And it's a lot more expensive.
>>
>> I prefect expense over corrupted filesystems or other equally not
>> nice situations.
>
> I prefer a well written program that doesn't require expensive bodges
> to k
On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 19:03 +0100, Gordan Bobic wrote:
> On 07/09/2012 05:25 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>
> >> And it's a lot more expensive.
> >
> > I prefect expense over corrupted filesystems or other equally not nice
> > situations.
>
> I prefer a well written program that doesn't require
15 matches
Mail list logo
