Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-xfs); Thu, 29 May 2003 20:50:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from oss.sgi.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h4U3o12x015795 for ; Thu, 29 May 2003 20:50:01 -0700 Received: (from xfs@localhost) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.9/8.12.8/Submit) id h4U3o1vg015794 for linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com; Thu, 29 May 2003 20:50:01 -0700 Received: from tolkor.sgi.com (tolkor.SGI.COM [198.149.18.6]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with SMTP id h4U3nw2x015775; Thu, 29 May 2003 20:49:59 -0700 Received: from flecktone.americas.sgi.com (flecktone.americas.sgi.com [192.48.203.135]) by tolkor.sgi.com (8.12.9/8.12.2/linux-outbound_gateway-1.2) with ESMTP id h4U45VVe017464; Thu, 29 May 2003 23:05:31 -0500 Received: from poppy-e236.americas.sgi.com (poppy-e236.americas.sgi.com [128.162.236.207]) by flecktone.americas.sgi.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/generic_config-1.2) with ESMTP id h4U3nqQK2366421; Thu, 29 May 2003 22:49:52 -0500 (CDT) Received: from stout.americas.sgi.com (stout.americas.sgi.com [128.162.232.50]) by poppy-e236.americas.sgi.com (8.12.9/SGI-server-1.8) with ESMTP id h4U3nqYl11004292; Thu, 29 May 2003 22:49:52 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 22:49:52 -0500 (CDT) From: Eric Sandeen X-X-Sender: sandeen@stout.americas.sgi.com To: bugzilla-daemon@oss.sgi.com cc: xfs-master@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: [Bug 247] New: xfs_force_shutdown In-Reply-To: <200305300245.h4U2jlAZ013416@oss.sgi.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-archive-position: 4180 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: linux-xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: sandeen@sgi.com Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-xfs Content-Length: 387 Lines: 12 > Then, I remounted device and unmont again and perform xfs_repair to fix it. And did xfs_repair find errors this time? What was the output? > Is this considered real memory problem or some bug in xfs file system? > I am using regular DIMM ram without ECC. Hard to say yet, but probably not a problem with your physical memory. You could run memtest86 (sp?) to double-check. -Eric