| To: | "Stefan Smietanowski" <stesmi@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: XFS: SB validate failed |
| From: | "Spam Magnet" <spam.wax@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 3 Jun 2008 15:39:07 -0400 |
| Cc: | "Timothy Shimmin" <tes@xxxxxxx>, "Eric Sandeen" <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| Dkim-signature: | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=cLI6zuruZDJ1bZ0knTuyZuET80CIehI57K9n5NIxzJ8=; b=WeVtSBb4+QpHFurCgPkUAPK3UVa6b8r+urcZrpiXBYkHA/HhaVpJX+TaUPmvz27x4Ej5Elb/2apaQRhavBgv7bYOxTjlrSK3muDPKfHrediBcbOzlbJv783bkyHSVd4dIba0yCksgTtJjHf4dypsYz4X3aZiEwWzedrOW3lWVl8= |
| Domainkey-signature: | a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=vIt96G7drocUocYPYGQwHp9ogUHLxVib04JsdauB32XQbnTefVvn6i2F2uGI+yh4w0wS0L+KsmdMeOcj7wdPfE5dIKOwPycZblM4ctkRY/rew58DzwKBEPkw6wxC7U9V73naaNY5839ldZeuqUJ0ifHe6SAwvNxRide5lwZpIm0= |
| In-reply-to: | <4845949F.7080209@stesmi.com> |
| References: | <3607657a0805291005k457791cej1c5f867da0f95965@mail.gmail.com> <3607657a0805301019h4a49dc86ne8f1f019629a1c41@mail.gmail.com> <4840406F.50402@stesmi.com> <48408D3E.3090401@gmail.com> <48409981.1050405@stesmi.com> <48425148.1080105@gmail.com> <48427DEE.40400@stesmi.com> <3607657a0806031036r702ab6a5w7ca6517c19395b9b@mail.gmail.com> <3607657a0806031056w24efa917q625f13bfe9eaa706@mail.gmail.com> <4845949F.7080209@stesmi.com> |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 2:59 PM, Stefan Smietanowski <stesmi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Spam Magnet wrote: >>> >>> (The healthy disk image also doesn't have any XFS but it has: 'S f x' >>> (capital s)) >> >> Correcting my mistake: >> >> The healthy image file does have the X F S B at 10000000 (octal) as >> fdisk had reported: >> Pt# Device Info Start End Sectors Id System >> 8: 2gb-ubuntu.img1 4096 3915599 3911504 a SGI xfs >> >> 4096*512=2097152 (10000000 octal): >> $ od -t c 2gb-ubuntu.img | grep 10000000 >> 10000000 X F S B \0 \0 020 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \a u 350 >> >> I tried to see if I can find do the same thing for jaz7.img: >> Pt# Device Info Start End Sectors Id System >> 8: jaz7.img1 3072 2091007 2087936 a SGI xfs >> >> $ od -t c jaz7.img | grep 6000000 >> 6000000 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 >> >> I guess all those zeros are not good signs. > > Wait a moment. Aren't jaz sectors 2k each? > > Try at 3072*2048 instead. > > // Stefan > I think they are but I used -u option of fdisk: $ fdisk -ul jaz7.img Disk jaz7.img (SGI disk label): 255 heads, 63 sectors, 0 cylinders Units = sectors of 1 * 512 bytes ----- partitions ----- Pt# Device Info Start End Sectors Id System 8: jaz7.img1 3072 2091007 2087936 a SGI xfs 9: jaz7.img2 0 3071 3072 0 SGI volhdr 11: jaz7.img3 0 2091007 2091008 6 SGI volume which lists partitions in sector units. As oppose to: $ fdisk -l jaz7.img Disk jaz7.img (SGI disk label): 255 heads, 63 sectors, 0 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 bytes ----- partitions ----- Pt# Device Info Start End Sectors Id System 8: jaz7.img1 1 130 2087936 a SGI xfs 9: jaz7.img2 0 0 3072 0 SGI volhdr 11: jaz7.img3 0 130 2091008 6 SGI volume |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: XFS: SB validate failed, Stefan Smietanowski |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Questions for article, Justin Piszcz |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: XFS: SB validate failed, Stefan Smietanowski |
| Next by Thread: | Re: XFS: SB validate failed, Stefan Smietanowski |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |