xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: How to use increased number of ACL entries?

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Kasparek Tomas <kasparek@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: How to use increased number of ACL entries?
From: "Michael L. Semon" <mlsemon35@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2013 23:18:06 -0500
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=gFU4917vAmv8fGjCJSt1ZSzpHxNIOfqnA0CkWYCtDog=; b=kddJjZD7Y1pEGmdKjIKN/Ym1uv8jiMXfl3ovHCQ1Doy/6FEpdUZ8aP8BcCpX2iwYqA 1EOdqS6xHssAVK/nIddYhy8RhWNhBOPB2m/2tRls4f1Fw7PjBvViSUfU+KlYfFM7Mc2e V9P7vHYR09m2rQ5xOS2ZB587Kci8ivdYrtVU3/X9tnyPj97yIyIrCDHjEIUirdoRt5J/ VHXs7tmup84tV4wADYjUYWKHC1hKf6DJFM/UpSS7AQXeCpWpjEigcoz8TrGfOLeCwHWP rMd/t5SEgFfbJ150CR+T2VzRY8lsJRPjJ6asfTl+fM0CxfstMEiV92CErltAsCvslofU w6pg==
In-reply-to: <5277086E.6030905@xxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20131103081704.GE9974@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <20131104003915.GN6188@dastard> <5277086E.6030905@xxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0
On 11/03/2013 09:37 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 11/3/13, 6:39 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 03, 2013 at 09:17:04AM +0100, Kasparek Tomas wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I'm trying to get more then 25 ACLs entries to work according to
>>> http://oss.sgi.com/pipermail/xfs/2013-May/026544.html . I'm running 3.10.x
>>> kernel which seems to contain these changes. I understand, that this is
>>> on-disk format change, so I expect to need new xfsprogs too. I tried the
>>> version from CentOS 6.4 (3.1.1) and one from git repo (
>>> git://oss.sgi.com/xfs/cmds/xfsprogs), but still it fails to create more then
>>> 25 ACL entries (21 user defined). Is there something I'm still missing?
>>
>> You haven't told mkfs to change the on disk format to enable more
>> than 25 ACLs. Only the version from git will do it, and your CentOS
>> kernel will not support it.
> 
> but the 3.10.x kernel you're running will IIRC; use "-m crc=1" on the mkfs.xfs
> commandline from a git mkfs.xfs.
> 
> -Eric
>  
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Dave.

Y'know, Eric, your best suggestions are always made when I'm working on a 
non-test PC that I don't really want to touch ;-)  But anyway, (i686 Pentium 
4, kernel 3.10.17)...

git xfsprogs will make the filesystem in question:

root@bpserver:/storage/devel/git-xfsprogs# mkfs/mkfs.xfs /dev/sdb3
mkfs.xfs: /dev/sdb3 appears to contain an existing filesystem (swap).
mkfs.xfs: Use the -f option to force overwrite.
root@bpserver:/storage/devel/git-xfsprogs# mkfs/mkfs.xfs -f -m crc=1 /dev/sdb3
meta-data=/dev/sdb3              isize=512    agcount=4, agsize=65536 blks
         =                       sectsz=512   attr=2, projid32bit=1
         =                       crc=1
data     =                       bsize=4096   blocks=262144, imaxpct=25
         =                       sunit=0      swidth=0 blks
naming   =version 2              bsize=4096   ascii-ci=0 ftype=1
log      =internal log           bsize=4096   blocks=12800, version=2
         =                       sectsz=512   sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=1
realtime =none                   extsz=4096   blocks=0, rtextents=0

However, it should be dirent (ftype=1 in the above output) that keeps a 
vanilla 3.10.17 kernel from mounting the resulting filesystem:

[438326.624667] XFS (sdb3): Version 5 superblock detected. This kernel has 
EXPERIMENTAL support enabled!
[438326.624667] Use of these features in this kernel is at your own risk!
[438326.624762] XFS (sdb3): Superblock has unknown incompatible features (0x1) 
enabled.
[438326.624762] Filesystem can not be safely mounted by this kernel.
[438326.624769] 8d76c000: 58 46 53 42 00 00 10 00 00 00 00 00 00 04 00 00  
XFSB............
[438326.624833] 8d76c010: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  
................
[438326.624897] 8d76c020: 60 b9 e2 ff 8f c5 41 f5 87 32 bc ea 7d 7b 8c 1b  
`.....A..2..}{..
[438326.624961] 8d76c030: 00 00 00 00 00 02 00 04 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 40  
...............@
[438326.625026] XFS (sdb3): Internal error xfs_sb_read_verify at line 730 of 
file fs/xfs/xfs_mount.c.  Caller 0x81123144
[438326.625026] 
[438326.625108] CPU: 0 PID: 58 Comm: kworker/0:1H Not tainted 3.10.17 #2
[438326.625110] Hardware name: Dell Computer Corporation Dimension 3000         
      /0N6381, BIOS A02 11/08/2004
[438326.625119] Workqueue: xfslogd xfs_buf_iodone_work
[438326.625123]  a4b38400 a4b38400 bde73e90 813ab881 bde73eb4 81124b91 a4b38400 
00000008
[438326.625130]  814593ac 813c5439 000002da 8145fee6 81123144 bde73ed4 81124bd6 
8145fee6
[438326.625136]  000002da 81123144 954cf500 00000016 a4b38400 bde73f00 811693c4 
8d76c000
[438326.625142] Call Trace:
[438326.625151]  [<813ab881>] dump_stack+0x16/0x18
[438326.625155]  [<81124b91>] xfs_error_report+0x45/0x47
[438326.625160]  [<81123144>] ? xfs_buf_iodone_work+0x52/0x67
[438326.625163]  [<81124bd6>] xfs_corruption_error+0x43/0x5d
[438326.625167]  [<81123144>] ? xfs_buf_iodone_work+0x52/0x67
[438326.625173]  [<811693c4>] xfs_sb_read_verify+0xd4/0xe5
[438326.625177]  [<81123144>] ? xfs_buf_iodone_work+0x52/0x67
[438326.625181]  [<81123144>] xfs_buf_iodone_work+0x52/0x67
[438326.625187]  [<81038920>] process_one_work+0xd5/0x2eb
[438326.625191]  [<8103923c>] worker_thread+0xea/0x2f8
[438326.625196]  [<81039152>] ? manage_workers.isra.37+0x21a/0x21a
[438326.625200]  [<8103d4c4>] kthread+0x8e/0x90
[438326.625207]  [<813af737>] ret_from_kernel_thread+0x1b/0x28
[438326.625211]  [<8103d436>] ? kthread_worker_fn+0xd3/0xd3
[438326.625214] XFS (sdb3): Corruption detected. Unmount and run xfs_repair
[438326.625271] XFS (sdb3): SB validate failed with error 22.

I don't know if the CentOS kernel has any extra patches that would enable 
this filesystem to be mounted.

There might be a way to bisect or revert the git xfsprogs back before dirent 
and giving that a try.  However, it seems best to start working with v5/CRC 
XFS starting with kernel 3.11.  If my luck with recent AIO commits was better, 
I'd recommend 3.12 instead because that's the real correct answer, problems 
aside.

Thanks!

Michael

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