xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: When LVM-0.9.1beta7 will be merged to XFS cvs tree?

To: Ragnar Kjørstad <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: When LVM-0.9.1beta7 will be merged to XFS cvs tree?
From: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 23:45:32 +0200
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>, kris buggenhout <buggenkr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Fang Han <dfbb@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20010705234137.E28075@xxxxxxxxxxx>; from xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 11:41:37PM +0200
References: <20010705151357.A2773@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <3B4417D5.ECDC1125@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20010705101747.A32674@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20010705234137.E28075@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 11:41:37PM +0200, Ragnar Kjørstad wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 10:17:47AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > All block devices in a XFS kernel need a special patch to add an ioctl
> > to set the logical block size. The original poster probably didn't add
> > that ioctl to his new hacked in LVM; which will cause all kinds of 
> > problems with xfs user tools and also probably file system corruption.
> 
> Is there a patch to add this ioctl to lvm?

Yes, just diff the XFS tree against a Linus tree.

> 
> Exactly what filesystem corruption will it cause, and under what
> circumstances?

fsck can corrupt the file system.
 
> If this is serious, maybe mkfs.xfs should refuse to build a filesystem
> on a device that doesn't support the ioctl?

Doesn't help, it depends on the running kernel which is a variable.
fsck should probably refuse to run, but it currently doesn't I think.


-Andi

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>