Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.2/8.11.3) id f5T91v728460 for linux-xfs-outgoing; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 02:01:57 -0700 Received: from mail.coltex.nl (IDENT:root@edge.coltex.nl [194.151.97.115]) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.2/8.11.3) with SMTP id f5T91tV28457 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 02:01:55 -0700 Received: from auto-nb1.xs4all.nl (auto-nb1.coltex.nl [10.0.1.171]) by mail.coltex.nl (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id f5T91oH15200; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 11:01:50 +0200 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010629105348.030147a8@pop.xs4all.nl> X-Sender: knuffie@pop.xs4all.nl X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 11:01:44 +0200 To: Simon Matter From: Seth Mos Subject: Re: XFS corruption on SoftRAID5 Cc: Steve Lord , linux-xfs In-Reply-To: <3B3C3C56.73D1C11C@ch.sauter-bc.com> References: <200106282148.f5SLmfw24451@jen.americas.sgi.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20010629090815.02e71aa8@pop.xs4all.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com Precedence: bulk At 10:29 29-6-2001 +0200, Simon Matter wrote: >Seth Mos schrieb: > >I'm not complaining. Your not. The coffee here must have been a bit on the strong side. > > Maybe a bit harsh but the md author might just be listening on the > > linux-kernel list. > >Until today, it seemed to be XFS related. Oh. I thought you noticed it earlier. > > The people here understand XFS all too well but they don't know the > > complete kernel in and out (could be wrong though). Another problem is that > > they unfortunately don't really have the time to fix all sorts of > kernel bugs. > > > >You're right. But on this list we have all those people using big disks >and raid volumes. So if the problem was somehow XFS/SoftRAID related, >where could I ask. True, but a lot of them are using hardware raid either IDE or scsi or fibre based. > > If you can produce a testcase in which you can generate corruption on the > > fs no matter what the fs is that would be helpful. Are you just seeing file > > names being garbled or ar the files themeselves also corrupt. What does a > > xfs_repair mention when you try to check it? Does it even report anything > > on that matter at all or does it decide to core dump because it's checking > > swiss cheese? > >It's the filnames and the files themselve. The hole blockdevice seems to >be corrupted. >Its not XFS,not SoftRAID. >Its something in the IDE subsystem. What IDE controller was it? A promise I believe? I unfortunately don't have experience with those controllers except for a Promise Ultra66 controller. You don't happen to have another IDE controller to test it with do you :) Do you also see a certain pattern in the fs corruption or is it just /dev/random ? > > Can you check out the CVS tree and build a kernel with that to simulate it. > > 2.4.5+ makes a big difference relative to 2.4.3. There have been some raid > > fixes in the past time. And 2.4.6 is approaching in a rapid pace. > > > > I'm placing my bet on the next version being 2.4.6. > > > > If you build a new kernel with the CVS tree (currently at 2.4.6-pre6) and > > can test if you see corruption again that would be helpful. Then we at > > least now what issues remain for the 1.0.1 installer. Although shipping a > > 2.4.5 in 1.0.1 might not be possible. > >Just tried rawhide 2.4.5-20010613 and it's exactly the same. Crap, so much for my theory. Oh well. Bye -- Seth Every program has two purposes one for which it was written and another for which it wasn't I use the last kind.