Re: fsck segfaults on rpi3 running 13-stable (and on 14-CURRENT analyzing the same file system that resulted from the 13-STABLE crash)

On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 03:27:46PM -0800, John-Mark Gurney wrote:
> 
> In this case, an inode's mtime is wildly incorrect.  Here is a simple
> patch that will let it get farther, BUT, it doesn't necessarily mean
> that the kernel can properly handle the mtime:
> diff --git a/sbin/fsck_ffs/inode.c b/sbin/fsck_ffs/inode.c
> index 82338f4f8c08..d0892a822dc5 100644
> --- a/sbin/fsck_ffs/inode.c
> +++ b/sbin/fsck_ffs/inode.c
> @@ -1311,7 +1311,10 @@ prtinode(struct inode *ip)
>         printf("SIZE=%ju ", (uintmax_t)DIP(dp, di_size));
>         t = DIP(dp, di_mtime);
>         p = ctime(&t);
> -       printf("MTIME=%12.12s %4.4s ", &p[4], &p[20]);
> +       if (p == NULL)
> +               printf("MTIME=invalid ");
> +       else
> +               printf("MTIME=%12.12s %4.4s ", &p[4], &p[20]);
>  }
>  
>  void

I tried to apply the patch with 
root@www:/usr/src # patch -p1 < fsck.patch
Hmm...  Looks like a unified diff to me...
The text leading up to this was:
--------------------------
|index 82338f4f8c08..d0892a822dc5 100644
|--- a/sbin/fsck_ffs/inode.c
|+++ b/sbin/fsck_ffs/inode.c
--------------------------
Patching file sbin/fsck_ffs/inode.c using Plan A...
Hunk #1 failed at 1311.
1 out of 1 hunks failed--saving rejects to sbin/fsck_ffs/inode.c.rej
Hmm...  Ignoring the trailing garbage.
done

Obviously I'm doing something dumb.....any hints?

Thanks for writing,

bob prohaska