From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751317Ab0JBQyi (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 Oct 2010 12:54:38 -0400 Received: from thunk.org ([69.25.196.29]:55516 "EHLO thunker.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750962Ab0JBQyh (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 Oct 2010 12:54:37 -0400 Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2010 12:54:33 -0400 From: "Ted Ts'o" To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , Kernel Testers List , Maciej Rutecki , Florian Mickler , Cesar Eduardo Barros Subject: Re: [Bug #19062] Dirtiable inode bdi default != sb bdi btrfs Message-ID: <20101002165433.GL21129@thunk.org> Mail-Followup-To: Ted Ts'o , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Kernel Testers List , Maciej Rutecki , Florian Mickler , Cesar Eduardo Barros References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tytso@thunk.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on thunker.thunk.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 10:04:15PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions > from 2.6.35. Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team > know (either way). > > > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19062 > Subject : Dirtiable inode bdi default != sb bdi btrfs > Submitter : Cesar Eduardo Barros > Date : 2010-09-23 0:54 (4 days old) > Message-ID : <4C9AA546.6050201@cesarb.net> > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=128520328929595&w=2 Note: I'm seeing this warning (Dirtiable inode bdi default != sb bdi) when I moved from 2.6.36-rc3 to 2.6.36-rc6, using ext4 as a root partition, and running mke2fs and e2fsck on ext2, ext3, and ext4 file systems. So I'm seeing this as a known regression from rc3 to rc6. Maybe it's different bug with ext4, but in any case, it's highly annoying. - Ted