| To: | "'Jonathan Groll'" <lists@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | RE: Unexpected inode type 0160000 causes abort of xfs_repair |
| From: | "Barry Naujok" <bnaujok@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 24 Nov 2006 10:58:08 +1100 |
| In-reply-to: | <20061123131405.GA27453@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| Thread-index: | AccPAUbEC40szw+9T+mfLcJp63ixbQAWdgKA |
Yes, this patch will be incorporated in the next xfsprogs update. And yes, it did blast the inode away, as it wasn't really an inode (or very very corrupted if it was). > -----Original Message----- > From: Jonathan Groll [mailto:lists@xxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Friday, 24 November 2006 12:14 AM > To: Barry Naujok; xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: Unexpected inode type 0160000 causes abort of xfs_repair > > On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 11:51:11AM +1100, Barry Naujok wrote: > > Can you try the attached patch and see how xfs_repair goes? > > Many thanks, the patch worked like a charm! Is it going to be > incorporated into the package in future? > > Luckily I didn't have to blast the inode away, but I suspect that is > exactly what the effect of the patch was ;-) > > Thanks again, > Jonathan |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] rethink removal of xattr syscall stubs (for now), Lachlan McIlroy |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Unexpected inode type 0160000 causes abort of xfs_repair, Barry Naujok |
| Previous by Thread: | Review: Clear unwritten flag on during partial page truncation, David Chinner |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Unexpected inode type 0160000 causes abort of xfs_repair, Barry Naujok |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |