Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*xfs\s+as\s+root\s+fs\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*xfs\s+as\s+root\s+fs\s*$/: 54 ]

Total 54 documents matching your query.

1. xfs as root fs (score: 1): Author: Thomas Graichen <news-innominate.list.sgi.xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: 8 Sep 2000 11:52:53 GMT; i run several machines for testing with xfs root filesystem and it looks like something is not working properly ... all the systems are dual bootable with ext2 root from which i max xfs_check or xfs_; /archives/xfs/2000-09/msg00098.html (9,491 bytes)
2. Re: xfs as root fs (score: 1): Author: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 10:23:16 -0500; I just tried three copies of a root filesystem into xfs using find / -mount -print | cpio -pdm /mnt/root In two out of the three cases running repair on the resulting filesystem I got a number of di; /archives/xfs/2000-09/msg00100.html (10,121 bytes)
3. Re: xfs as root fs (score: 1): Author: Thomas Graichen <news-innominate.list.sgi.xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: 8 Sep 2000 15:41:13 GMT; yes - the things i usually had were the /var/run/sybsys/* files on readhat - so stuff changed or removed in the shutdown process t -- thomas.graichen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx technical director innominate AG cl; /archives/xfs/2000-09/msg00102.html (11,808 bytes)
4. Re: xfs as root fs (score: 1): Author: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 10:40:20 -0500; .... OK, this is a red herring, these were files from the lost+found on the root filesystem, so xfs_repair removed its lost+found to start with, so it was not finding anything wrong really. This bas; /archives/xfs/2000-09/msg00103.html (8,927 bytes)
5. Re: xfs as root fs (score: 1): Author: Thomas Graichen <news-innominate.list.sgi.xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: 8 Sep 2000 15:48:56 GMT; hmmm in my cases the files were real (just on several real machines i get it after some time of use) - i also usually do an xfs_repair mount rm -rf lost+found xfs_repair <- is fine now umount reboot; /archives/xfs/2000-09/msg00105.html (10,397 bytes)
6. Re: xfs as root fs (score: 1): Author: Russell Cattelan <cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 13:08:51 -0500; Drat, I thought had cleaned this up. This seems to happen when the last call to sync doesn't fully complete, or more file system activity comes in after the call to sync. This gets back to the proble; /archives/xfs/2000-09/msg00107.html (10,262 bytes)
7. Re: xfs as root fs (score: 1): Author: Thomas Graichen <news-innominate.list.sgi.xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: 8 Sep 2000 18:18:20 GMT; due to my experience i had it nearly everytime when i checked ... i may reboot and check this machine in a few minutes and see and maybe send you the xfs_repair output ... so a few minutes from now .; /archives/xfs/2000-09/msg00108.html (11,194 bytes)
8. Re: xfs as root fs (score: 1): Author: Russell Cattelan <cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 13:27:25 -0500; I'll restart my xfs root fs machine with the latest build... see what happens. Maybe it's a recent change.; /archives/xfs/2000-09/msg00111.html (10,808 bytes)
9. Re: xfs as root fs (score: 1): Author: Thomas Graichen <news-innominate.list.sgi.xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: 8 Sep 2000 19:30:43 GMT; hmmm - schroedingers cat - i just tried to reproduce it and now it works all time ... so if you have other things to work on just ignore this one until i have reproduced it better and can give you so; /archives/xfs/2000-09/msg00115.html (10,651 bytes)
10. Re: xfs as root fs (score: 1): Author: Russell Cattelan <cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 15:36:40 -0500; Try this patch... it may help. This will issue another round of trying to sync the fs to a clean state. In talking with Steve about this, it may be possible for xfs inodes to not completely be flushe; /archives/xfs/2000-09/msg00117.html (10,863 bytes)
11. Re: xfs as root fs (score: 1): Author: Thomas Graichen <news-innominate.list.sgi.xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: 11 Sep 2000 08:03:10 GMT; but why this should help - i never got the "XFS: Failed to sync .." line ... ok but maybe PVFS_SYNC does not do it's job completely all the time - is that the idea? btw. i redid all on my machine at; /archives/xfs/2000-09/msg00135.html (13,604 bytes)
12. Re: xfs as root fs (score: 1): Author: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 10:03:45 -0500; 15:31:09 The issue here is not a failure, but the fact that there is some code in XFS at the moment which effectively makes a complete sync out of the filesystem take two sync calls, so currently th; /archives/xfs/2000-09/msg00140.html (12,098 bytes)
13. Re: xfs as root fs (score: 1): Author: Thomas Graichen <news-innominate.list.sgi.xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: 12 Sep 2000 21:03:32 GMT; this is what i get for the failed mount retrys: Start mounting filesystem: ide0(3,5) XFS: xlog_find_verify_log_record: need to back-up XFS: failed to find log head XFS: log mount/recovery failed XFS:; /archives/xfs/2000-09/msg00158.html (11,030 bytes)
14. Re: xfs as root fs (score: 1): Author: Ken McDonell <kenmcd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 08:49:50 +1100; Thomas, if you still have the source tree that was used to make this kernel, can you please let me know which version of cmd/xfs/repair/phase2.c you have? The symptoms sound exactly like the problem; /archives/xfs/2000-09/msg00161.html (9,323 bytes)
15. Re: xfs as root fs (score: 1): Author: Russell Cattelan <cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 21:04:39 -0500; Thomas, if you still have the source tree that was used to make this kernel, can you please let me know which version of cmd/xfs/repair/phase2.c you have? The symptoms sound exactly like the problem; /archives/xfs/2000-09/msg00166.html (9,897 bytes)
16. Re: xfs as root fs (score: 1): Author: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 08:48:20 -0500; If you get a filesystem into this state, can you run xfs_logprint on it and send me the output. Just give logprint the block device name and no other argument, it should dump out the log contents in; /archives/xfs/2000-09/msg00169.html (9,177 bytes)
17. Re: xfs as root fs (score: 1): Author: Thomas Graichen <news-innominate.list.sgi.xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: 13 Sep 2000 19:26:46 GMT; it's 1.29 - so this should be the reason - somehow the update must have missed it ... will update again and come back if the error is still there (what i don't expect) thanks t -- thomas.graichen@xxx; /archives/xfs/2000-09/msg00174.html (9,863 bytes)
18. Re: xfs as root fs (score: 1): Author: Thomas Graichen <news-innominate.list.sgi.xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: 13 Sep 2000 22:05:16 GMT; ok - that it was - error is gone now after an update ... also: steve since the two times sync i did not see the xfs_repair problems with xfs as a root fs anymore ... t -- thomas.graichen@xxxxxxxxxxxx; /archives/xfs/2000-09/msg00178.html (10,303 bytes)
19. xfs as root fs (score: 1): Author: Thomas Graichen <news-innominate.list.sgi.xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: 8 Sep 2000 11:52:53 GMT; eserver - then i run the xfs root fs and will start n; /archives/xfs/2000-09/msg00460.html (9,491 bytes)
20. Re: xfs as root fs (score: 1): Author: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 10:23:16 -0500; l there, can you send us a backtrace from the core du; /archives/xfs/2000-09/msg00462.html (10,121 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2] [3]