From: Theodore Tso <tytso@MIT.EDU>
To: Christian Kujau <lists@nerdbynature.de>
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Free blocks count wrong following shrink with resize2fs
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 17:14:21 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081228221421.GB15434@mit.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0812281047450.24239@bogon.housecafe.de>
On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 11:00:11AM +0100, Christian Kujau wrote:
> Since I'm not *entirely* sure if this is related to the the extent header
> issue[0], I thought I just report it:
>
> When shrinking a filesystem with resize2fs, fsck.ext4 (1.41.3,
> 12-Oct-2008) reports:
>
> ------------
> Pass 5: Checking group summary information
> Block bitmap differences: -(2488--2493) -(149959--151395)
> Fix<y>? yes
> Free blocks count wrong for group #0 (3188, counted=3194).
> Fix<y>? yes
> Free blocks count wrong for group #4 (10182, counted=11619).
> Fix<y>? yes
> Free blocks count wrong (26225, counted=27668).
> Fix<y>? yes
> -----------
It's a separate problem, but thanks, I know about it. This one is
relatively harmless; it's caused by resize2fs assuming that the
metadata blocks for block group N are in block group N, which is not
true if flex_bg is enabled. It's very much related to the bug which
causes resize2fs -M to not function correctly.
The net result is the blocks that should be released as being free
aren't, which is what causes the e2fsck errors, which can be easily
corrected. It doesn't cause any other problems, though.
> PS: As my rootfs is also on ext4, I noticed another, completely unrelated oddity:
>
> [ 1.604198] Using IPI Shortcut mode
> [ 1.608394] input: AT Translated Set 2 keyboard as /devices/platform/i8042/serio0/input/input0
> [ 1.737198] EXT3-fs: hda1: couldn't mount because of unsupported optional features (240).
> [ 1.754302] EXT4-fs: barriers enabled
> [ 1.773267] kjournald2 starting. Commit interval 5 seconds
>
> ...this is befor INIT starts, so who's trying to mount "/" as ext3 first?
This is normal; the kernel simply tries to mount the filesystem using
ext3 first, so that the ext4 code only gets used for filesystems that
enable the new ext4 features. The kernel isn't particularly smart
about doing filesystem type detection; it simply tries to mount the
root filesystem using a ordered list of filesystem until one of them
works.
- Ted
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-12-28 22:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-28 10:00 Free blocks count wrong following shrink with resize2fs Christian Kujau
2008-12-28 22:14 ` Theodore Tso [this message]
2008-12-29 6:23 ` Christian Kujau
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=20081228221421.GB15434@mit.edu \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lists@nerdbynature.de \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox