Thomas Graichen wrote:
>
> waht is the rough current status of xfs at the moment ?
>
> i'am currently trying to use it in non critical but productive
> situations (it gets used but it's no problem if it breaks :-)
> so far and it seems to be useable but it looks like it still
> has some seroius problems - for instance - i sometimes boot
> with a etx2 rootfs (i ususally use xfs for /) and run the
> repair_xfs and it finds problems in cleanly unmounted
> filesystems ... so maybe xfs is not ready for rootfs
> or repair_xfs is not finished so far ... so is this
> problem expected - or should i mail the errors i
> get - if - to someone ?
There was a problem with inodes on disk getting corrupted.
This was fixed a couple of days back:
------------
Date: Wed Jul 26 14:48:43 PDT 2000
Workarea: jen.cray.com:/src/lord/xfs-linux.2.4.0-test1
Undoes mod: 2.4.0-test1-xfs:slinx:65181a
The following file(s) were checked into:
bonnie.engr.sgi.com:/isms/slinx/2.4.0-test1-xfs
Modid: 2.4.0-test1-xfs:slinx:67878a
linux/mm/vmalloc.c - 1.16
linux/include/linux/vmalloc.h - 1.10
-------------
To quickly check if you have the fix, look in vmalloc.h. It
should have the last argument to vmalloc_area_pages as
"struct page ***pages", i.e with a triple indirection. The
buggy code had only a double indirection.
One other known and still open bug is:
BUG 797419 - xfs_iget goes recursive and dies a horrible death
but you would get a kernel oops when that happens, so
I don't believe you are seeing it.
Could you please ensure that you have the vmalloc fix
and re-run your tests? If you still see problems, please
send a report.
thanks!
ananth.
|