xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: fs corruption not detected by xfs_check or _repair

To: Marco Maisenhelder <marco@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: fs corruption not detected by xfs_check or _repair
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 05:22:22 -0400
Cc: Chris Wedgwood <cw@xxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4C671E83.4060106@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <4C656149.6050604@xxxxxxxxxx> <20100814183537.GA13734@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4C671E83.4060106@xxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17)
On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 12:53:55AM +0200, Marco Maisenhelder wrote:
> Chris Wedgwood wrote:
> >On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 05:14:17PM +0200, Marco Maisenhelder wrote:
> >
> >>*marco:/etc# ls -lrt /store/xfs_corruption/x/
> >>ls: cannot access /store/xfs_corruption/x/db.backup2: Invalid argument
> >>ls: cannot access /store/xfs_corruption/x/db.backup1: Invalid argument
> >>total 0
> >>?????????? ? ? ? ?                ? db.backup2
> >>?????????? ? ? ? ?                ? db.backup1
> >
> >where these created with inode64 and now mounted w/o that option?  (in
> >which case inodes > 32-bit are inaccessible)
> 
> I wasn't even aware of the option - I guess I should have spent more
> time reading the FAQ before trying to find a more complex problem :(
> 
> inode64 was my problem - mouting the partition with -o inode64 fixes
> all weirdness.

FYI: starting from kernel 2.6.35 you can access all the inodes even
without -o inode64 and won't get these strange errors.

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