From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Vladimir V. Saveliev" Subject: Re: corrupted disk Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 18:10:50 +0400 Message-ID: <434BC7EA.7090905@namesys.com> References: <200510111602.24857.listuser@peternixon.net> <20051011133104.GA2763@favonius> <200510111634.40710.listuser@peternixon.net> <20051011135522.GB2763@favonius> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com In-Reply-To: <20051011135522.GB2763@favonius> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: sander@humilis.net Cc: Peter Nixon , reiserfs-list@namesys.com, Vitaly Fertman Hello Sander wrote: > Peter Nixon wrote (ao): >>On Tuesday 11 October 2005 16:31, Sander wrote: >>>Peter Nixon wrote (ao): >>>>At 06:15 this morning the following errors showed up in /var/log/messages >>>> >>>>Oct 11 06:15:03 DB2MUHASEBE kernel: kernel BUG at prints.c:334! >>>>Oct 11 06:15:03 DB2MUHASEBE kernel: invalid operand: 0000 2.4.21-138-smp >>>>#1 SMP Fri Oct 31 00:51:31 UTC 2003 >>>> >>>>Oct 11 06:15:03 DB2MUHASEBE kernel: EIP: 0010:[] Tainted: >>>>P >>>Your kernel is very, very old and tainted. >>Yes. I am aware of that. As I mentioned the server is an IBM server running >>SUSE Linux Enterprise 8 and DB2. At the time of deployment of the server SLES >>9 was not yet certified to run with DB2. > > What I'm trying to say is that you are very unlikely to receive support > on such an old kernel. And most likely the bug is fixed in a younger > kernel. > > And, you are also running a tainted kernel. You are less likely to > receive support on a tainted kernel. > The filesystem should not have been eaten. We can to understand what did happen with it. Even if kernel managed somehow wipe filesystem superblock out - it could not (well, it should not) corrupt all the data.