xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [xfs-masters] 2.6.29-rc: kernel BUG at fs/xfs/support/debug.c:108

To: Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [xfs-masters] 2.6.29-rc: kernel BUG at fs/xfs/support/debug.c:108
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 04:22:10 +0100
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs-masters@xxxxxxxxxxx, kernel-testers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <a4423d670901231034k6971ed91tbed3d6eab05d7285@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20090110152803.GA7469@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20090110221459.GA8873@orion> <20090111104659.GB8071@disturbed> <a4423d670901111648w26e86baajcf7b6d98ff37d043@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20090112034550.GI8071@disturbed> <a4423d670901120008j728af9cdrbed8bbb938117ea3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20090112211848.GL8071@disturbed> <a4423d670901201054t3e48ece2ned4a7e3254250fce@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20090120203319.GA7103@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <a4423d670901231034k6971ed91tbed3d6eab05d7285@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.28i
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 09:34:36PM +0300, Alexander Beregalov wrote:
> But I do not need LBD. Does XFS strongly require LBD?
> Should I always turn it on even if I do not have files or devices of size 
> 2Tb+ ?

The bug is now fixed in the development tree, but until you upgrade
to a kernel with the fix enabling CONFIG_LBD will keep you from hitting
the bug.

As you unfortunately noticed the !CONFIG_LBD case doesn't really get
much test coverage, so I would personally recommend turning it on even
if you don't need it.

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