[Top] [All Lists]

RE: XFS corruption on 2.4.28

To: "'Ludek Finstrle'" <luf@xxxxxxxxxx>, "'Eric Sandeen'" <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: XFS corruption on 2.4.28
From: "Renaat Dumon" <renaat.dumon@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 11:19:08 +0100
Cc: <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20051101092045.GB26576@soptik.pzkagis.cz>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcXexZY2SlmJkhvXQmGqTAQrhx9UwgAB/avw
Thanks, but putting another kernel on that box might not be that easy, I get
this box in an "appliance" form. I don't have the kernel .config etc


-----Original Message-----
From: Ludek Finstrle [mailto:luf@xxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: 01 November 2005 10:21
To: Eric Sandeen
Cc: Renaat Dumon; linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: XFS corruption on 2.4.28

> >I notice this behaviour few weeks ago (max. 4 weeks). There is a 
> >patch for it in CVS.  Try search through mail-archiv for "df vs du -sk"
(or similar).
> I -think- that that fix is for a different problem... in that previous 
> case, xfs_repair could correctly repair the filesystem, without moving 
> files to lost+found.

I'm not so sure. xfs_repair moved / and some other files to lost+found in
first run after a long time (and xfs_fsr).
I try xfs_fsr and xfs_repair after few hours next time. So it seems
conformable to my problems.
I didn't try remount. Finally file with same size has same odd size (I don't
remember the right numbers: e.g. 4321 -> 774329921, ...)

I think Renaat could try the fix. He doesn't go to bigger problems when he
try it.
I know I had to run xfs_fsr but my filesystem isn't under heavy load.


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