Slashdot Mirror


EXT4 Data Corruption Bug Hits Linux Kernel

An anonymous reader writes "An EXT4 file-system data corruption issue has reached the stable Linux kernel. The latest Linux 3.4, 3.5, 3.6 stable kernels have an EXT4 file-system bug described as an apparent serious progressive ext4 data corruption bug. Kernel developers have found and bisected the kernel issue but are still working on a proper fix for the stable Linux kernel. The EXT4 file-system can experience data loss if the file-system is remounted (or the system rebooted) too often."

15 of 249 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Bisected? by Gothmolly · · Score: 4, Funny

    No this means the kernel has bug-like tendencies from time to time, but is not exclusively buggy. For instance when it's in college, or if its at a bar, and has had a few drinks, well then it might be buggy, but normally at work and at home and to all its friends it acts stable.

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
  2. This is why I stick to Reiser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I know he'd never do anything to harm me or my data.

    1. Re:This is why I stick to Reiser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Or your wife?

    2. Re:This is why I stick to Reiser by localhost8080 · · Score: 2, Funny

      yeah, reiser 4 has some killer features

  3. I don't see the problem then... by Zapotek · · Score: 5, Funny

    The EXT4 file-system can experience data loss if the file-system is remounted (or the system rebooted) too often.

    We're talking about Linux users here...move along.

  4. Really clever... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 5, Funny

    The EXT4 file-system can experience data loss if the file-system is remounted (or the system rebooted) too often."

    They're trying to boost the average uptime of all installations by making people keep their machines turned on. It's just a continuation of the uptime war waged with the BSD folks!

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  5. The file system dug too greedily... by Bovius · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...and too deep. It awoke a being of segfaults and kernel panics.

  6. Re:Reiserfs became 'murderfs'... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    So clearly the answer is General Tso's FS. Delicious, but you'll lose your data an hour later.

  7. Your Papers Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    grammar nazi's

    grammar Nazis

  8. In other words... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    This is what you get when you use a filesystem that wasn't developed by a real company.

    Because if they had to worry about losing money, they would make damned sure that problem didn't exist. Or at least make it go away. I thought this "problem" existed with ext4 for years.

    Yeah, Micro$oft is evil, but their FS works. And file corruption isn't a serious issue except when hard drives fail, and, well, in that case...DERP!

  9. LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    The EXT4 file-system can experience data loss if the file-system is remounted (or the system rebooted) too often."

    "You're just rebooting it wrong."
    -Loonix filesystem developer

  10. Re:Bisected? by EMR · · Score: 3, Funny

    If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.

    Nah, He only needs the latest SHA1 for each roll outcome commit as that'll point up the GIT tree :-D

  11. Re:Bisected? by fireman+sam · · Score: 1, Funny

    Bisecting is also a way of killing bugs - or perhaps Bisecting is when you act like an insect that goes both ways.

    --
    it is only after a long journey that you know the strength of the horse.
  12. Re:Bisected? by Nivag064 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Nah!

    Your'e wrong!!

    The 0's go to the top of the page, and the 1's to the bottom!!!

    (As the 0's have air bubbles that make them float...)

    [An irrelevant irrelevancy?]

  13. Re:Well of course! by isorox · · Score: 3, Funny

    Lastly, my geek friends, mounting too often can cause burning friction which can destroy data and cause irritation and discomfort.

    I never had a problem with frequent mounting, however I have now found a side effect from a mount I performed last year. A child-process was forked into existence shortly after the mount, and now we find we're continuously receiving interrupts from the process, which has affected pretty much every aspect of system administration.

    I find that performing the mount is occasionally possible, but having to umount to give resources to deal with the child process (which often core dumps, and needs a lot of user interaction), before ejecting can lead to frustration and cold showers.

    Most of the time my team is simply trying to run sleep whenever we can.