On Tue, Aug 12, 2003 at 05:13:51PM +1000, Scott Fagg wrote:
> >hi Scott,
> >
> >The reason you don't see errors on older kernels is because
> >there was none of the extra corruption checking code in those
> >kernels, and hence no xfs_error_report routine, so we wouldn't
> >dump things to the console as we do now. So, those console
> >errors are harmless; I have a fix to shut them up and will
> >check that in shortly.
>
> I take it then that i'm not actually getting a corrupt filesystem,
> which would explain xfs_repair and xfs_check never return anything.
Thats correct.
> Would your observations also fit in with the behaviour i see when an
> inode gets damaged ( missing default ACL ? ) and still triggers the
> kernel errors if i access that node when the filesystem has is nowhere
> near full ?
Yes, definately. Its not that its missing an ACL, its that the
inode has a partially initialised attribute fork (which is OK),
because we got part way through initialising it and then got an
ENOSPC; later attribute name lookups on that inode are reporting
an error (not OK) because of that, the inode is just in a state
they were not expecting - it is a valid state though.
cheers.
--
Nathan
|