Re: [Danger] Re: test8-pre4: innd fixed?

2000-09-05 Thread Horst von Brand
=?iso-8859-1?Q?Andr=E9_Dahlqvist?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: [...] > Believe it or not, but I just saw something similar on test7 while > reading linux-kernel with Mutt. A recent message to linux-kernel from > Daniel Philips got partly zeroed out, and partly tangled up with a > message from the

Re: [Danger] Re: test8-pre4: innd fixed?

2000-09-05 Thread Alexander Viro
On Tue, 5 Sep 2000, Alexander Viro wrote: > Damn... OK, I'm building it with the obvious fix. Works here (truncates of files with different sizes, holes and not, with cold and populated caches). Linus, could you please do the following: ed fs/ext2/inode.c

Re: [Danger] Re: test8-pre4: innd fixed?

2000-09-05 Thread Alexander Viro
On Tue, 5 Sep 2000, Alexander Viro wrote: > I'll try to reproduce this sucker... Did it. Gentlemen, how long will it take you to notice something strange in the following? static inline int all_zeroes(u32 *p, u32 *q) { while (p < q) if (*p++)

Re: [Danger] Re: test8-pre4: innd fixed?

2000-09-05 Thread Alexander Viro
On Tue, 5 Sep 2000, Simon Kirby wrote: > I just upgraded to test8pre4 from test7 and was reading this and some > other emails with mutt. Upon quiting mutt, mutt reported that there was > some sort of error while attempting to write the folder. My folder now > looks like this: > > <1073152

Re: [Danger] Re: test8-pre4: innd fixed?

2000-09-05 Thread André Dahlqvist
On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 10:41:43AM +0200, Martin Costabel wrote: > Of the 650 messages I kept in my Inbox, only the first 51 > remained. The rest was replaced by 0x00. Not nice. Not at all. Feels > like your ordinary Microsoft Word virus. Nothing like that happened > with earlier kernels up to

Re: [Danger] Re: test8-pre4: innd fixed?

2000-09-05 Thread Martin Costabel
Simon Kirby wrote: > There is something definitely now even more broken with test8pre4. > > I just upgraded to test8pre4 from test7 and was reading this and some > other emails with mutt. Upon quiting mutt, mutt reported that there was > some sort of error while attempting to write the folder.

Re: [Danger] Re: test8-pre4: innd fixed?

2000-09-05 Thread Alexander Viro
On Tue, 5 Sep 2000, Simon Kirby wrote: I just upgraded to test8pre4 from test7 and was reading this and some other emails with mutt. Upon quiting mutt, mutt reported that there was some sort of error while attempting to write the folder. My folder now looks like this: 1073152 bytes of

Re: [Danger] Re: test8-pre4: innd fixed?

2000-09-05 Thread Alexander Viro
On Tue, 5 Sep 2000, Alexander Viro wrote: I'll try to reproduce this sucker... Did it. Gentlemen, how long will it take you to notice something strange in the following? static inline int all_zeroes(u32 *p, u32 *q) { while (p q) if (*p++)

Re: [Danger] Re: test8-pre4: innd fixed?

2000-09-05 Thread Horst von Brand
=?iso-8859-1?Q?Andr=E9_Dahlqvist?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: [...] Believe it or not, but I just saw something similar on test7 while reading linux-kernel with Mutt. A recent message to linux-kernel from Daniel Philips got partly zeroed out, and partly tangled up with a message from the

[Danger] Re: test8-pre4: innd fixed?

2000-09-04 Thread Simon Kirby
On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 09:09:43PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, 4 Sep 2000, Mohammad A. Haque wrote: > > > > Is this file corruption 'thing' specific to innd or is it the same > > problem reported with corrupt mailboxes with pre2 and high disk > > activity? > > The mailbox corruption

[Danger] Re: test8-pre4: innd fixed?

2000-09-04 Thread Simon Kirby
On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 09:09:43PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: On Mon, 4 Sep 2000, Mohammad A. Haque wrote: Is this file corruption 'thing' specific to innd or is it the same problem reported with corrupt mailboxes with pre2 and high disk activity? The mailbox corruption thread is