Re: downgrade from kernel 3.17 to 3.10

[Austin S Hemmelgarn <ahferroin7@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1603 bytes --]

On 2014-10-21 11:34, Cristian Falcas wrote:
> I will start investigating how can we build our own rpms from the 3.16
> sources. Until then we are stuck with the ones from the official repos
> or elrepo. Which means 3.10 is the latest for el6. We used this until
> now and seems we where lucky enough to not hit anything bad.
>
IIRC there is a make target in the kernel sources that generates the 
appropriate RPM's for you, although doing so from mainline won't get you 
any of the patches from Oracle that they use in el.
> We upgraded to 3.17 because we use ceph on the machine with openstack
> and on the ceph site they recommended >3.14. And because we need
> writable snapshots, we are forced to use btrfs under ceph.
>
> Thank you all for your advice.
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 6:20 PM, Robert White <rwhite@pobox.com> wrote:
>> On 10/21/2014 06:18 AM, Cristian Falcas wrote:
>>>
>>> Thank you for your answer.
>>>
>>> I will reformat the disk with a 3.10 kernel in the meantime, because I
>>> don't have any rpms for 3.16 now.
>>
>>
>> More concisely: Don't use 3.10 BTRFS for data you value. There is a
>> non-trivial chance that the problems you observed are/were due to "bad
>> things" on the disk written there by 3.10.
>>
>> There is no value to recreating your file systems under 3.10 as the same
>> thing is likely to go bad again when you get out of the dungeon.
>>
>> What are your RPM options? What about just getting the sources from
>> kernel.org and compiling your won 3.16.5?
>>
>> Seriously, 3.10.... just... no...
>>
>> 8-)
>>



[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 2455 bytes --]