You write:
> Ok, this is probabally old news and has been fixed, but
> the following happened in kernel 2.4.3 (ironically when i was deleting
> /usr/src/linux in order to extract the latest 2.4.5 :-)
Old news for me, fixed this bug in January, see:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.co
On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 10:45:59PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > May 8 01:11:29 pervalidus kernel: EXT2-fs error (device ide0(3,3)): ext2_readdir:
>bad entry in
> > directory #162813: directory entry across blocks - offset=92, inode=45,
>rec_len=16404,
> > name_len=9
> Since it is al
Federic Meunier writes:
> ==> /var/log/syslog <==
> May 8 00:25:52 pervalidus kernel: EXT2-fs error (device ide0(3,3)): ext2_readdir:
>bad entry in
> directory #162813: directory entry across blocks - offset=92, inode=45,
>rec_len=16404,
> name_len=9
> May 8 00:25:52 pervalidus kernel: EXT
> > I got the following while rm -rf'ing my mozilla cvs checkout. Deadly or not
>deadly?
>
> Highly deadly.
>
> Your disk is dropping bits, or, more likely, your RAM. This is very,
> very bad.
if it was 2.2 I'd believe it. 2.4 is still showing these kind of problems in
software on many VIA c
> Linux vingeren.girl 2.4.3-pre7 #5 Mon Mar 26 23:33:59 EST 2001 i686 unknown
>
> EXT2-fs error (device ide2(33,3)): ext2_free_blocks: bit already cleared for block
>1048576
> EXT2-fs error (device ide2(33,3)): ext2_free_blocks: bit already cleared for block
>1048576
>
> ^
> I got the followin
khromy wrote:
> Linux vingeren.girl 2.4.3-pre7 #5 Mon Mar 26 23:33:59 EST 2001 i686 unknown
>
> EXT2-fs error (device ide2(33,3)): ext2_free_blocks: bit already cleared for block
>1048576
> EXT2-fs error (device ide2(33,3)): ext2_free_blocks: bit already cleared for block
>1048576
>
> ^
> I go
On Sun, 25 Feb 2001, A E Lawrence wrote:
> A E Lawrence wrote:
> >
> > A E Lawrence wrote:
> > >
> > > Alan Cox wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I have seen similar problems on stock 2.4.2 a machine which has not run
> > > > > 2.4.1.
> > > >
> > > > What disk controllers ? We really need that sort of inf
A E Lawrence wrote:
>
> A E Lawrence wrote:
> >
> > Alan Cox wrote:
> > >
> > > > I have seen similar problems on stock 2.4.2 a machine which has not run
> > > > 2.4.1.
> > >
> > > What disk controllers ? We really need that sort of info in order to see the
> > > pattern in the odd reports of cor
On Sat, 24 Feb 2001, Alan Cox wrote:
>> I have seen similar problems on stock 2.4.2 a machine which has not run
>> 2.4.1.
>
>What disk controllers ? We really need that sort of info in order to see the
>pattern in the odd reports of corruption we get
>
>-
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the
A E Lawrence wrote:
>
> Alan Cox wrote:
> >
> > > I have seen similar problems on stock 2.4.2 a machine which has not run
> > > 2.4.1.
> >
> > What disk controllers ? We really need that sort of info in order to see the
> > pattern in the odd reports of corruption we get
Problems have just start
Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > I have seen similar problems on stock 2.4.2 a machine which has not run
> > 2.4.1.
>
> What disk controllers ? We really need that sort of info in order to see the
> pattern in the odd reports of corruption we get
Sorry:-
00:07.1 IDE interface: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT82
> I have seen similar problems on stock 2.4.2 a machine which has not run
> 2.4.1.
What disk controllers ? We really need that sort of info in order to see the
pattern in the odd reports of corruption we get
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of
Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > > Possibly the result of the 'silent' bug in 2.4.1?
> >
> > you are not the only one who found this bug. immediately after booting 2.4.2 i
> > received dozens of these errors, resulting in _major_ filesystem corruption.
> > after a half hour of fsck'ing i managed to bring th
On Fri, 23 Feb 2001, Alan Cox wrote:
> Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 19:26:17 + (GMT)
> From: Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: EXT2-fs error
>
> > > Possibly the re
On Fri, 23 Feb 2001, Ian Wehrman wrote:
> Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 13:12:05 -0600
> From: Ian Wehrman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: EXT2-fs error
>
> Mohammad A. Haque <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Possibly the result of the 'silent' bug in 2.4.1?
>
> you are not the only one who found this bug. immediately after booting 2.4.2 i
> received dozens of these errors, resulting in _major_ filesystem corruption.
> after a half hour of fsck'ing i managed to bring the machine back into a usable
Mohammad A. Haque <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I got the following after compiling/rebooting into 2.4.2 and forcing a
> fsck.
>
> EXT2-fs error (device ide0(3,3)): ext2_readdir: bad entry in directory
> #508411: rec_len is smaller than minimal - offset=0, inode=0, rec_len=0,
> name_len=0
> EXT2-f
Well, here's the whole situtation...
Compiled 2.4.2 and reboot forcing fsck. No errors.
Tried mounting a cd image via loopback to see if loopback was working
again. Mount hangs. Reboot command stalled waiting for filesystems to
unmount. Force with alt-sysreq-. Booted w/o any errors. Restart
forc
Mohammad A. Haque writes:
> I got the following after compiling/rebooting into 2.4.2 and forcing a
> fsck.
Did fsck complain? If not, then it is a 2.4.2 kernel/driver bug, possibly
not reading any data from disk (the below errors are generated from a zero
filled directory block).
> EXT2-fs erro
On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 12:04:28PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> Decoding the first few words to hex, then ASCII gives
> sts.pte_spinlock
> #define pgtable_cache_size (pgt_quicklists.pgtable_cache_sz)
> #define pgd_
>
> and I it continues. The defines are from include/asm-sparc/pgalloc.h
>
You write:
> Got these in 2.4.0. Sorry if it's a known problem: I haven't been following
> the list very closely. This is a 100 MHz pentium and the kernel was compiled
> with gcc version egcs-2.91.66 19990314/Linux (egcs-1.1.2 release). After
> booting to 2.2.latest.latest fsck did its fscking wit
Andries,
The crap out is between 2.4.0-test5 and 2.4.0-test6.
It takes four drives that were single partitioned and rips the first 130
blocks out and creates 4 bogus partitions.
Partition check:
/dev/ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0: p1 p2 p3 < p5 p6 p7 p8 p9 p10 >
/dev/ide/host0/bus0/target1/lun
On Mon, 18 Sep 2000, Andries Brouwer wrote:
> If this is an unpatched vanilla 2.4.0test8 then I am surprised.
> But if it is a patched version I would prefer to blame the patch.
Andries,
Going back to 2.4.0test5 with my patch it works perfectly.
I will move this forward to 2.4.0test8, but all t
On Mon, Sep 18, 2000 at 04:50:55AM -0700, Andre Hedrick wrote:
[ext2 errors and fdisk complaints on 2.4.0test8, patched?]
Andre,
(i) Geometry does not play any role in the functioning of Linux -
it is only a matter to LILO and fdisk. So, if you meet
a strange geometry, then that is surprising,
Linux cascade 2.4.0-test8 #1 Sat Sep 16 23:50:47 PDT 2000 i686 unknown
Andre Hedrick
The Linux ATA/IDE guy
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
On Mon, 18 Sep 2000, Andre Hedrick wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Sep 2000, Alexander Viro wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Erm. What version it was?
>
> 1.18-125 (installed 1.18-125) SuSE 7.0 Professional
>
> If you want the srpm will send it offline.
Sorry, what kernel version were you using?
-
To uns
On Mon, 18 Sep 2000, Alexander Viro wrote:
>
>
> Erm. What version it was?
1.18-125 (installed 1.18-125) SuSE 7.0 Professional
If you want the srpm will send it offline.
Andre Hedrick
The Linux ATA/IDE guy
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
t
Erm. What version it was?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
28 matches
Mail list logo
