From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756933AbaCDJMi (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Mar 2014 04:12:38 -0500 Received: from extern.plris.com ([212.199.10.23]:54504 "EHLO plris.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756667AbaCDJMa (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Mar 2014 04:12:30 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 1103 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Tue, 04 Mar 2014 04:12:30 EST From: Leon Pollak To: Brian Norris Cc: Richard Weinberger , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, Linux Kernel , Al Viro , Artem Bityutskiy Subject: Re: What is wrong? Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2014 10:54:04 +0200 Message-ID: <20500571.Fgyz0I6ATm@leonp.plris.com> Organization: PLR Information Systems User-Agent: KMail/4.11.5 (Linux/3.12.9-201.fc19.x86_64; KDE/4.11.5; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20140304083325.GJ13420@norris-Latitude-E6410> References: <4315632.KkRm7kzq26@leonp.plris.com> <20140303211336.GA7369@gmail.com> <20140304083325.GJ13420@norris-Latitude-E6410> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, all. I am really sorry for the silence - I was on the business trip and returned today. I will recheck everything and try. Meanwhile, the news are not good: our guys say that it appears that the additional sync DOES NOT SOLVE the issue. I ask for excuse, but as I did not know the exact processing, I was mistaken and, probably, used already gc-ted unit for tests. Sorry, again. BR On Tuesday 04 March 2014 00:33:25 Brian Norris wrote: > On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 03:13:36PM -0600, Andrew Ruder wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 01:22:08PM -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > > > Perhaps Richard or Andrew can comment on whether this patch should > > > help you. But I think JFFS2 on NAND uses write-buffered support > > > which can be affected by this bug. > > > > Definitely sounds like the same issue and I'm kind of glad to see it > > crop up in another filesystem. > > We haven't confirmed that the *patch* actually affects Leon's problem; > just that if he runs an additional 'sync' it solves his problem. > Leon, did you get to try the patch? > > Anyway, should commit 807612db2f9940b9fa6deaef054eb16d51bd3e00 be > marked for -stable? > > Brian -- Leon