<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes" ?>
<!DOCTYPE bugzilla SYSTEM "https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/page.cgi?id=bugzilla.dtd">

<bugzilla version="5.0.6"
          urlbase="https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/"
          
          maintainer="it-coreprojects-helpdesk@linuxfoundation.org"
>

    <bug>
          <bug_id>2343</bug_id>
          
          <creation_ts>2012-04-19 04:02:43 +0000</creation_ts>
          <short_desc>sugarbay/huronriver/crownbay: abnormal filesystem-related messages in dmesg</short_desc>
          <delta_ts>2012-06-14 20:28:18 +0000</delta_ts>
          <reporter_accessible>1</reporter_accessible>
          <cclist_accessible>1</cclist_accessible>
          <classification_id>7</classification_id>
          <classification>Build System, Metadata &amp; Runtime</classification>
          <product>BSPs</product>
          <component>bsps-configuration</component>
          <version>unspecified</version>
          <rep_platform>x86</rep_platform>
          <op_sys>Multiple</op_sys>
          <bug_status>RESOLVED</bug_status>
          <resolution>OBSOLETE</resolution>
          
          
          <bug_file_loc></bug_file_loc>
          <status_whiteboard>(P2)</status_whiteboard>
          <keywords></keywords>
          <priority>Medium</priority>
          <bug_severity>normal</bug_severity>
          <target_milestone>1.3</target_milestone>
          
          
          <everconfirmed>1</everconfirmed>
          <reporter name="Tom Zanussi">tom.zanussi</reporter>
          <assigned_to name="Yang Shi">yang.shi</assigned_to>
          <cc>dvhart</cc>
    
    <cc>yp.bsp.watcher</cc>
    
    <cc>yp.watcher</cc>
          
          
          <cf_os>---</cf_os>
          <cf_regression_type>---</cf_regression_type>
          
          <cf_docchange>---</cf_docchange>

      

      

      

          <comment_sort_order>oldest_to_newest</comment_sort_order>  
          <long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>20699</commentid>
    <comment_count>0</comment_count>
    <who name="Tom Zanussi">tom.zanussi</who>
    <bug_when>2012-04-19 04:02:43 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>On a couple different machines, I&apos;ve been noticing some abnormal filesystem-related messages after booting from a live image.

On all of them, I see this message:

mount: sending ioctl 5310 to a partition!

And on huronriver and crownbay, but not sugarbay (same USB stick as on huronriver) I&apos;ve seen messages like:

EXT3-fs (sda3): error: unable to read superblock
EXT3-fs (sda1): error: couldn&apos;t mount because of unsupported optional features (240)
attempt to access beyond end of device
sda3: rw=0, want=4, limit=2
EXT2-fs (sda3): error: unable to read superblock
EXT2-fs (sda1): error: couldn&apos;t mount because of unsupported optional features (240)
EXT3-fs (sda5): error: couldn&apos;t mount because of unsupported optional features (240)
EXT2-fs (sda5): error: couldn&apos;t mount because of unsupported optional features (240)
mount: sending ioctl 5310 to a partition!
mount: sending ioctl 5310 to a partition!
attempt to access beyond end of device
sda3: rw=0, want=66, limit=2
isofs_fill_super: bread failed, dev=sda3, iso_blknum=16, block=32

attempt to access beyond end of device
sda3: rw=0, want=4, limit=2
EXT3-fs (sda3): error: unable to read superblock
attempt to access beyond end of device
sda3: rw=0, want=4, limit=2
EXT2-fs (sda3): error: unable to read superblock
EXT3-fs (sda1): error: couldn&apos;t mount because of unsupported optional features (240)
EXT3-fs (sda5): error: couldn&apos;t mount because of unsupported optional features (240)
EXT2-fs (sda1): error: couldn&apos;t mount because of unsupported optional features (240)
attempt to access beyond end of device
sda3: rw=0, want=4, limit=2
MINIX-fs: unable to read superblock
EXT2-fs (sda5): error: couldn&apos;t mount because of unsupported optional features (240)
attempt to access beyond end of device
sda3: rw=0, want=4, limit=2
EXT3-fs (sda3): error: unable to read superblock
attempt to access beyond end of device
sda3: rw=0, want=4, limit=2
EXT2-fs (sda3): error: unable to read superblock
EXT3-fs (sda1): error: couldn&apos;t mount because of unsupported optional features (240)
EXT3-fs (sda5): error: couldn&apos;t mount because of unsupported optional features (240)
EXT2-fs (sda1): error: couldn&apos;t mount because of unsupported optional features (240)
EXT2-fs (sda5): error: couldn&apos;t mount because of unsupported optional features (240)
mount: sending ioctl 5310 to a partition!
mount: sending ioctl 5310 to a partition!
attempt to access beyond end of device

These messages didn&apos;t exist with 1.1.  Normally you get these kinds of messages with bad media, but they seem to be too consistent for that explanation (and the fact that the same media on different machines doesn&apos;t show this on one but does on the other).  Not sure of the significance, the operation of the system seems normal otherwise, but it needs to be investigated.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>20757</commentid>
    <comment_count>1</comment_count>
    <who name="Bruce Ashfield">bruce.ashfield</who>
    <bug_when>2012-04-20 03:49:18 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>This is likely triggered by unionfs as well, see bug 2331.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>22219</commentid>
    <comment_count>2</comment_count>
    <who name="Darren Hart">dvhart</who>
    <bug_when>2012-06-14 20:24:56 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>With Union FS reverted, do we close this bug? There isn&apos;t anything to do here other than reimplement UnionFS with this in mind.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>22220</commentid>
    <comment_count>3</comment_count>
    <who name="Darren Hart">dvhart</who>
    <bug_when>2012-06-14 20:25:09 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>22221</commentid>
    <comment_count>4</comment_count>
    <who name="Yang Shi">yang.shi</who>
    <bug_when>2012-06-14 20:25:53 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>Yes, I agree.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>22224</commentid>
    <comment_count>5</comment_count>
    <who name="Darren Hart">dvhart</who>
    <bug_when>2012-06-14 20:28:18 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>Marking as obsolete as the unionfs causing the bug has been reverted.</thetext>
  </long_desc>
      
      

    </bug>

</bugzilla>