Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 20:13:08 -0500 From: Eric Jacobs <eaja@erols.com> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ufs types Message-ID: <200211230113.gAN1DDBj029844@smtp.goamerica.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0211221642100.15030-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0211221642100.15030-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I put this bug in on July 17. It's still open. Problem Report bin/40697 fsck[_ffs](8) doesn't ensure that (signed) cylinder group rotor values are non-negative I considered it a bug in fsck and included a patch. Eric On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, Julian Elischer wrote: > Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 16:48:03 -0800 (PST) > To: fs@freebsd.org > From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> > CC: mckusick@mckusick.com > Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org > Subject: ufs types > > > > We had a system on site today that fell over every time re tried to boot > it. Causing delays in probably many millions of dollars of transfers. > The reason was a currupt word in the cylinder group summary information. > a word had been trashed becoming -ve, and fsck didn't check against > -ve numbers in that (a rotor value). Noticing that most fields are not > checked against being -ve in fsck we started looking at fixing it.. > until we realised that the far quicker answer was to define them to be > unsigned in ufs.h and just fix the compile errors.. The values are > usually checked for reasonable +ve values. > > > Does anyone have a reason why we should not do this in FreeBSD? > > > (fix the superblock and cg summary blocks to have mostly unsigned > values..) > > > julian > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200211230113.gAN1DDBj029844>