All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Brad Campbell <lists2009@fnarfbargle.com>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: Azat Khuzhin <a3at.mail@gmail.com>, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Online resize issue with 3.13.5 & 3.15.6
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2014 16:00:24 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <53D75498.1010603@fnarfbargle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140729024651.GA14680@thunk.org>

On 29/07/14 10:46, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 09:46:20PM +0800, Brad Campbell wrote:
>> Fast forward 12 months and
>> I've added 2 drives to the array and bumped up against this issue. So it was
>> initially 4883458240 blocks. It would have been created with e2fsprogs from
>> Debian Stable (so 1.42.5).
>
> Confirmed; debian stable's mke2fs version 1.42.5 does the wrong thing
> if you do:
>
>     mke2fs -t ext4 -O 64bit,resize_inode /mnt/foo.img  19T
>
> It creates a file system which is has a resize_inode which --- well,
> is in a format that the kernel isn't capable of handling and which is
> not something that was originally intended.  The interesting thing is
> that resize2fs 1.42.11 is apparently able to handle resizing the above
> file system created with mke2fs 1.42.5.

And it did just fine once patched for the 32bit overflow. The off-line 
resize went without a hitch. Oddly enough the Kernel took it out to 
5641863168 blocks ok in the first online attempt.

> Mke2fs 1.42.12 will avoid creating a resize_inode for file systems >
> 16T, so this situation doesn't arise.
>
> I need to take a closer look to see if there's some way I can teach
> the kernel to be able to deal with this file system, but for now, you
> can work around it by using tune2fs to remove the resize_inode, and
> after running e2fsck and remounting the file system, the on-line
> resize will work correctly.

Would it not be easier just to put a test in resize2fs which says "I 
can't do that, please fix your filesystem first" ?

1.42.5 won't try (32 bit limit).
1.42.11 will spin (32 bit overflow)
So just make 1.42.12 abort with an error.

Is it worth having e2fsck check for mis-applied features and flags?

      reply	other threads:[~2014-07-29  8:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-07-20 11:26 Online resize issue with 3.13.5 & 3.15.6 Brad Campbell
2014-07-21  1:03 ` Brad Campbell
2014-07-25  4:33   ` Brad Campbell
2014-07-25  8:13   ` Azat Khuzhin
2014-07-25 11:44     ` Brad Campbell
2014-07-25 14:07       ` Theodore Ts'o
2014-07-26  3:31         ` Brad Campbell
2014-07-26  4:12           ` Brad Campbell
2014-07-26  7:04             ` Azat Khuzhin
2014-07-26  7:45           ` Azat Khuzhin
2014-07-26 12:45           ` Theodore Ts'o
2014-07-26 12:57             ` Azat Khuzhin
2014-07-26 13:46             ` Brad Campbell
2014-07-26 13:56               ` Theodore Ts'o
2014-07-29  2:46               ` Theodore Ts'o
2014-07-29  8:00                 ` Brad Campbell [this message]

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=53D75498.1010603@fnarfbargle.com \
    --to=lists2009@fnarfbargle.com \
    --cc=a3at.mail@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    /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.