From: Michael Weissenbacher <mw@dermichi.com>
To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: regarding the inode64 mount option
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2009 12:29:13 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A24FEF9.6050309@dermichi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A1EAB31.7090604@sandeen.net>
Hi Eric + Christoph!
> http://sandeen.net/wordpress/?p=9
This is a scary list indeed! Does this apply only to Fedora on i686 or also to x86_64?
In general, does the inode64 option make sense at all on a partition that is <1TB in size?
> Actually they should still be accessible, we just won't create new
> inodes not addressable by 32bit inode numbers.
Well, in my tests it didn't work. I tried this is on fedora core 6 with vanilla kernel 2.6.28.10 x86_64. See here:
(when mounted without inode64)
[root@mojave ~]# ls /backup/ -lha
ls: cannot access /backup/mojave_gentoo_backup: Invalid argument
total 8.0K
drwxr-xr-x 6 root root 99 2009-05-25 18:07 .
drwxr-xr-x 26 root root 4.0K 2009-05-28 17:38 ..
drwxr-xr-x 4 amandabackup disk 51 2009-05-07 15:46 amanda_holdings
?????????? ? ? ? ? ? mojave_gentoo_backup
drwx--x--x 4 root root 41 2009-04-29 11:57 servers
drwxrwxrwt 2 root root 6 2009-06-02 10:38 tmp
[root@mojave ~]# ls /backup/mojave_gentoo_backup -lha
ls: cannot access /backup/mojave_gentoo_backup: Invalid argument
[root@mojave ~]#
(when mounted with inode64)
[root@mojave ~]# ls /backup/ -lha
total 12K
drwxr-xr-x 6 root root 99 2009-05-25 18:07 .
drwxr-xr-x 26 root root 4.0K 2009-05-28 17:38 ..
drwxr-xr-x 4 amandabackup disk 51 2009-05-07 15:46 amanda_holdings
drwxr-xr-x 23 root root 4.0K 2009-05-05 10:53 mojave_gentoo_backup
drwx--x--x 4 root root 41 2009-04-29 11:57 servers
drwxrwxrwt 2 root root 6 2009-06-02 10:38 tmp
[root@mojave ~]# ls /backup/mojave_gentoo_backup/ -lha
total 27M
drwxr-xr-x 23 root root 4.0K 2009-05-05 10:53 .
drwxr-xr-x 6 root root 99 2009-05-25 18:07 ..
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 10 2009-05-05 11:53 backup
(snipped)
The filesystem is consistent - xfs_check (3.0.1) doesn't report any problems.
thanks,
Michael
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-02 10:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-28 12:21 regarding the inode64 mount option Michael Weissenbacher
2009-05-28 14:56 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-05-28 15:18 ` Eric Sandeen
2009-06-02 10:29 ` Michael Weissenbacher [this message]
2009-06-02 13:24 ` Felix Blyakher
2009-06-02 16:13 ` Felix Blyakher
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4A24FEF9.6050309@dermichi.com \
--to=mw@dermichi.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=sandeen@sandeen.net \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.