xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: synchronization of XFS

To: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: synchronization of XFS
From: Stefan Smietanowski <stesmi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 23:41:54 +0100
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Chris Wedgwood <cw@xxxxxxxx>, "IKARASHI, Seiichi" <ikarashi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <40635F04.6010109@xfs.org>
References: <4060F7FC.8090602@miraclelinux.com> <20040325063902.GA9697@dingdong.cryptoapps.com> <4062C97A.6030702@miraclelinux.com> <20040325124152.GA12078@dingdong.cryptoapps.com> <4062D7E5.6070501@stesmi.com> <20040325132200.GA12333@dingdong.cryptoapps.com> <4062E19A.90207@xfs.org> <20040325140723.GA12558@dingdong.cryptoapps.com> <20040325144519.A23764@infradead.org> <40635F04.6010109@xfs.org>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316
Steve Lord wrote:

> Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> 
>>
>>>> Now if grub is opening the block device and reading out of that, it
>>>> is looking at the same pages for metadata that xfs is looking at in
>>>> memory. There is a bug where you can get corruption if you access
>>>> the block device in parallel with the filesystem. Possibly this is
>>>> behind the problem.
>>>
>>>
>>> This will cause an oops on 2.6.x won't it --- so I suspect if this is
>>> behind the problem the report will be have been different.
>>
>>
>>
>> I don't think they're hitting the problem, the symptoms look very 
>> different.
>>
> 
> And thinking about it some more, having grub make the filesystem remount 
> readonly would force everything down to disk unlike just doing a sync
> call.

Tried and failed :(

Tried that before but it didn't help unfortunately.

// Stefan


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>