xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: First 128KB of XFS partition is NULL.

To: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: First 128KB of XFS partition is NULL.
From: Ajeet Yadav <ajeet.yadav.77@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 11:45:41 +0900
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=AS9CUroIk2xwTY9O66/fhmSKWSq79K3uSzqBucQTorY=; b=GsLp9zriTAD7DaK1N0/Q2IKqNOnTZedsTBVD67B3ihtf6yF/jr4HKYZSy+z2aYt3pl GP+wIowV583AoFQJt34rolM4BjLM7Gk4c/aOFhSshbRnCYHr6ArMxS16EQl91cm8b4KL c5ypIiVZuw26UJOb6/02+hYIcTi1xA8in/q0I=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=AkpbKx4G0a+arKzkO0whoUbkffa4ORUIzxyK+ZjNHnfXfWlsdoXqvG5huDE+4BGMhy ut5DKv1Deu7MkV0dRMXZXEhf3IsNnDF1JYxvGeHMmDESCso1OiiCpftnthSoWptD5InJ /zUoHWhs+aVVikYS4VOOqVH6m+v6TGDekD10g=
In-reply-to: <AANLkTindiB_D7shZKkrdkePM=xaAXCe1HAX5tPy87SCy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <AANLkTindiB_D7shZKkrdkePM=xaAXCe1HAX5tPy87SCy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Testing team provides a very little information, but after checking
all possiblity I cam to conclusion that he may have removed the USB
during formating when mkfs.xfs just finished "Zero out the beginning
of the device, to obliterate any old filesystem signatures out there"

Issue resolved, thanks

On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Ajeet Yadav <ajeet.yadav.77@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Dear All,
> I have received a corrupted disk from team testing XFS, when I look
> hexdump of partiton. Its 0000 in first 128KB.
> Our kernel is 2.6.30.9 however we have backported XFS from 2.6.34,
> Arch MIP with VIPT cache.
> This arch previously had many issues but after properly implementing
> "xfs: fix xfs to work with Virtually Indexed architectures " most
> problem resolved.
>
> Can anyone make guess in what case first 128KB may become NULL, I seem
> to be impossible because file system does not modify all 128KB at the
> begining of partition at once.
>

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