Can't mount nilfs - error searching super root.

Can't mount nilfs - error searching super root.

[Milos Jana]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2301 bytes --]

Hi,
After 2 weeks of successful using of NILFS on my pendrive I encountered this
error:

milos@computer:~$ sudo mount /media/pendrive/
[sudo] password for user:
mount.nilfs2: Error while mounting /dev/sdb on /media/pendrive: Invalid
argument

First, I thought there was something wrong with /etc/fstab entry, which
looks like this:

/dev/sdb /media/pendrive nilfs2 noauto,user,rw 0 0

But it looked the same when drive was working fine, I also tried different
parameters but it did not help. The last two lines from dmesg output made me
even more worry:

[ 759.733075] usb 7-3: new high speed USB device using ehci_hcd and address
5
[ 763.362043] usb 7-3: configuration #1 chosen from 1 choice
[ 763.713991] usbcore: registered new interface driver libusual
[ 763.730554] Initializing USB Mass Storage driver...
[ 763.730704] scsi5 : SCSI emulation for USB Mass Storage devices
[ 763.732474] usbcore: registered new interface driver usb-storage
[ 763.732480] USB Mass Storage support registered.
[ 763.732647] usb-storage: device found at 5
[ 763.732649] usb-storage: waiting for device to settle before scanning
[ 768.732513] usb-storage: device scan complete
[ 768.733715] scsi 5:0:0:0: Direct-Access USB 2.0 Flash Disk 1100 PQ: 0
ANSI: 0 CCS
[ 768.747539] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] 62652416 512-byte hardware sectors (32078
MB)
[ 768.748544] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] Write Protect is off
[ 768.748552] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] Mode Sense: 43 00 00 00
[ 768.748557] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] Assuming drive cache: write through
[ 768.752786] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] 62652416 512-byte hardware sectors (32078
MB)
[ 768.753780] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] Write Protect is off
[ 768.753787] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] Mode Sense: 43 00 00 00
[ 768.753792] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] Assuming drive cache: write through
[ 768.753803] sdb: sdb1
[ 768.857613] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] Attached SCSI removable disk
[ 768.857786] sd 5:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg2 type 0
[ 1130.248957] NILFS warning: Segment magic number invalid
[ 1130.248965] NILFS: error searching super root.

I'm using nilfs2-tools 2.0.3-1 on kernel 2.6.27-10, the error also occurs
after upgrade to nilfs2-utils and nilfs kernel module 2.0.6.

How can I recover this drive? I didn't create any checkpoints, afair the
only thing I have done was to create the new filesystem using mkfs.nilfs2
command.

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 2491 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 158 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users-JrjvKiOkagjYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org
https://www.nilfs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: Can't mount nilfs - error searching super root.

[Ryusuke Konishi]

Hi,
On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 23:04:30 +0100, "Milos Jana" wrote:
> Hi,
> After 2 weeks of successful using of NILFS on my pendrive I encountered this
> error:
> 
> milos@computer:~$ sudo mount /media/pendrive/
> [sudo] password for user:
> mount.nilfs2: Error while mounting /dev/sdb on /media/pendrive: Invalid
> argument
> 
> First, I thought there was something wrong with /etc/fstab entry, which
> looks like this:
> 
> /dev/sdb /media/pendrive nilfs2 noauto,user,rw 0 0
> 
> But it looked the same when drive was working fine, I also tried different
> parameters but it did not help. The last two lines from dmesg output made me
> even more worry:
<snip>
> 
> I'm using nilfs2-tools 2.0.3-1 on kernel 2.6.27-10, the error also occurs
> after upgrade to nilfs2-utils and nilfs kernel module 2.0.6.

Thanks for reporting the trouble.
 
> How can I recover this drive? I didn't create any checkpoints, afair the
> only thing I have done was to create the new filesystem using mkfs.nilfs2
> command.

Could you try the test version of fsck available in the follwing url?

https://www.nilfs.org/pipermail/users/2008-December/000350.html

The patch is against nilfs-utils, and it will generate
fsck0.nilfs2 in nilfs2-utils/sbin/mkfs directory.

 Patch Usage:
 $ cd nilfs-utils-2.0.6
 $ patch -p1 < path-to-fsck0.patch
 $ ./configure
 $ make
 $ sudo make install
 $ sudo fsck0.nilfs2 <device>

Regards,
Ryusuke

Re: Can't mount nilfs - error searching super root.

[Milos Jana]

I managed to apply the patch (the file fsck0.nilfs2.c was created) but
after building nilfs-utils I can't find fsck0.nilfs2 command, it looks
like it was not compiled.

Here is build log: http://wklej.org/id/39551/

Re: Can't mount nilfs - error searching super root.

[Ryusuke Konishi]

Hi!
On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:03:07 +0100, "Milos Jana" wrote:
> I managed to apply the patch (the file fsck0.nilfs2.c was created) but
> after building nilfs-utils I can't find fsck0.nilfs2 command, it looks
> like it was not compiled.
> 
> Here is build log: http://wklej.org/id/39551/

Okay. In some environment, Makefiles are not regenerated automatically.
You may have to run automake and autoconf before running the
./configure script.  The full build procedures are as follows:

 $ tar jxf nilfs-utils-2.0.6.tar.bz2
 $ cd nilfs-utils-2.0.6
 $ patch -p1 < path-to-fsck0.patch
[ usually omissible
 $ aclocal
 $ autoheader
 $ libtoolize -c --force
 $ automake -a -c
 $ autoconf
] 
 $ ./configure
 $ make

 $ sudo make install
 $ sudo fsck0.nilfs2 <device>

If your machine doesn't have autoconf, automake, or libtool package,
these may be required in advance.

How did it come out?

Ryusuke

Re: Can't mount nilfs - error searching super root.

[Milos Jana]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1533 bytes --]

Nilfs-utils compiled properly with patch after following instructions from
your previous post. Here is what came out:

user@laptop:~$ sudo fsck0.nilfs2 /dev/sdb
Super-block:
  revision = 2.0, checksum = OK
  blocksize = 4096
  write time = 2008-12-28 09:48:42
  indicated partial segment: blocknr = 4263936
  segnum = 2082, seq = 11746, cno=6661

Clean FS.

user@laptop:~$ sudo mount /media/pendrive/
mount.nilfs2: Error while mounting /dev/sdb on /media/pendrive: Invalid
argument

On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 6:01 PM, Ryusuke Konishi <ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> Hi!
> On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:03:07 +0100, "Milos Jana" wrote:
> > I managed to apply the patch (the file fsck0.nilfs2.c was created) but
> > after building nilfs-utils I can't find fsck0.nilfs2 command, it looks
> > like it was not compiled.
> >
> > Here is build log: http://wklej.org/id/39551/
>
> Okay. In some environment, Makefiles are not regenerated automatically.
> You may have to run automake and autoconf before running the
> ./configure script.  The full build procedures are as follows:
>
>  $ tar jxf nilfs-utils-2.0.6.tar.bz2
>  $ cd nilfs-utils-2.0.6
>  $ patch -p1 < path-to-fsck0.patch
> [ usually omissible
>  $ aclocal
>  $ autoheader
>  $ libtoolize -c --force
>  $ automake -a -c
>  $ autoconf
> ]
>  $ ./configure
>  $ make
>
>  $ sudo make install
>  $ sudo fsck0.nilfs2 <device>
>
> If your machine doesn't have autoconf, automake, or libtool package,
> these may be required in advance.
>
> How did it come out?
>
> Ryusuke
>

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 2227 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 158 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users-JrjvKiOkagjYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org
https://www.nilfs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: Can't mount nilfs - error searching super root.

[Ryusuke Konishi]

On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:10:19 +0100, "Milos Jana" wrote:
> Nilfs-utils compiled properly with patch after following instructions from
> your previous post. Here is what came out:
> 
> user@laptop:~$ sudo fsck0.nilfs2 /dev/sdb
> Super-block:
>   revision = 2.0, checksum = OK
>   blocksize = 4096
>   write time = 2008-12-28 09:48:42
>   indicated partial segment: blocknr = 4263936
>   segnum = 2082, seq = 11746, cno=6661
> 
> Clean FS.
> 
> user@laptop:~$ sudo mount /media/pendrive/
> mount.nilfs2: Error while mounting /dev/sdb on /media/pendrive: Invalid
> argument

Hmm, that's weird.

The partition was cleanly unmounted, but the final segment seems not
to be written to the disk.

Maybe, we need 'force' option to treat such situation.

In the meatime, could you try the following (additional) patch?

Regards,
Ryusuke
--

diff --git a/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c b/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c
index d3d335f..0d51e54 100644
--- a/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c
+++ b/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c
@@ -905,10 +905,12 @@ static void nilfs_fsck(const char *device)
 	print_pseg_message(&pseg_ref, "    indicated partial segment");
 	fputc('\n', stderr);
 
+#if 0
 	if (le16_to_cpu(sb.s_state) & NILFS_VALID_FS) {
 		fprintf(stderr, "Clean FS.\n");
 		goto out_clean;
 	}
+#endif
 
 	if (nilfs_do_recovery(devfd, &pseg_ref) == 0)
 		goto out;

Re: Can't mount nilfs - error searching super root.

[Milos Jana]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2490 bytes --]

user@laptop:~/prog/sources/nilfs-utils-2.0.6$ sudo fsck0.nilfs2 /dev/sdb
[sudo] password for user:
Super-block:
  revision = 2.0, checksum = OK
  blocksize = 4096
  write time = 2008-12-28 09:48:42
  indicated partial segment: blocknr = 4263936
  segnum = 2082, seq = 11746, cno=6661

empty or bad segment: segnum = 2082, blocknr = 4263936
The latest segment is lost. Trying rollback recovery..
.
Searching the latest checkpoint.
Selected segment: blocknr = 4261888
  segnum = 2081, seq = 11745, cno=6660
  creation time = 2008-12-28 09:48:34
Do you wish to overwrite super block (y/N)? Y
Recovery will complete on mount.
user@laptop:~/prog/sources/nilfs-utils-2.0.6$ sudo mount /media/pendrive/
mount.nilfs2: Error while mounting /dev/sdb on /media/pendrive: Invalid
argument

dmesg returns the same errors:
[ 553.003240] NILFS warning: Segment magic number invalid
[ 553.003248] NILFS: error searching super root.

On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 8:55 AM, Ryusuke Konishi <ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:10:19 +0100, "Milos Jana" wrote:
> > Nilfs-utils compiled properly with patch after following instructions
> from
> > your previous post. Here is what came out:
> >
> > user@laptop:~$ sudo fsck0.nilfs2 /dev/sdb
> > Super-block:
> >   revision = 2.0, checksum = OK
> >   blocksize = 4096
> >   write time = 2008-12-28 09:48:42
> >   indicated partial segment: blocknr = 4263936
> >   segnum = 2082, seq = 11746, cno=6661
> >
> > Clean FS.
> >
> > user@laptop:~$ sudo mount /media/pendrive/
> > mount.nilfs2: Error while mounting /dev/sdb on /media/pendrive: Invalid
> > argument
>
> Hmm, that's weird.
>
> The partition was cleanly unmounted, but the final segment seems not
> to be written to the disk.
>
> Maybe, we need 'force' option to treat such situation.
>
> In the meatime, could you try the following (additional) patch?
>
> Regards,
> Ryusuke
> --
>
> diff --git a/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c b/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c
> index d3d335f..0d51e54 100644
> --- a/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c
> +++ b/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c
> @@ -905,10 +905,12 @@ static void nilfs_fsck(const char *device)
>        print_pseg_message(&pseg_ref, "    indicated partial segment");
>        fputc('\n', stderr);
>
> +#if 0
>        if (le16_to_cpu(sb.s_state) & NILFS_VALID_FS) {
>                fprintf(stderr, "Clean FS.\n");
>                goto out_clean;
>        }
> +#endif
>
>        if (nilfs_do_recovery(devfd, &pseg_ref) == 0)
>                goto out;
>

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 3578 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 158 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users-JrjvKiOkagjYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org
https://www.nilfs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: Can't mount nilfs - error searching super root.

[Ryusuke Konishi]

On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 10:38:16 +0100, Milos Jana wrote:
> user@laptop:~/prog/sources/nilfs-utils-2.0.6$ sudo fsck0.nilfs2 /dev/sdb
> [sudo] password for user:
> Super-block:
>   revision = 2.0, checksum = OK
<snip>
> Searching the latest checkpoint.
> Selected segment: blocknr = 4261888
>   segnum = 2081, seq = 11745, cno=6660
>   creation time = 2008-12-28 09:48:34
> Do you wish to overwrite super block (y/N)? Y

Oops, use 'y' instead of 'Y'.

Sorry for the unfriendly interface.
I'll fix it in a next time.

Ryusuke

> Recovery will complete on mount.
> user@laptop:~/prog/sources/nilfs-utils-2.0.6$ sudo mount /media/pendrive/
> mount.nilfs2: Error while mounting /dev/sdb on /media/pendrive: Invalid
> argument
> 
> dmesg returns the same errors:
> [ 553.003240] NILFS warning: Segment magic number invalid
> [ 553.003248] NILFS: error searching super root.
> 
> On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 8:55 AM, Ryusuke Konishi <ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:10:19 +0100, "Milos Jana" wrote:
> > > Nilfs-utils compiled properly with patch after following instructions
> > from
> > > your previous post. Here is what came out:
> > >
> > > user@laptop:~$ sudo fsck0.nilfs2 /dev/sdb
> > > Super-block:
> > >   revision = 2.0, checksum = OK
> > >   blocksize = 4096
> > >   write time = 2008-12-28 09:48:42
> > >   indicated partial segment: blocknr = 4263936
> > >   segnum = 2082, seq = 11746, cno=6661
> > >
> > > Clean FS.
> > >
> > > user@laptop:~$ sudo mount /media/pendrive/
> > > mount.nilfs2: Error while mounting /dev/sdb on /media/pendrive: Invalid
> > > argument
> >
> > Hmm, that's weird.
> >
> > The partition was cleanly unmounted, but the final segment seems not
> > to be written to the disk.
> >
> > Maybe, we need 'force' option to treat such situation.
> >
> > In the meatime, could you try the following (additional) patch?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ryusuke
> > --
> >
> > diff --git a/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c b/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c
> > index d3d335f..0d51e54 100644
> > --- a/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c
> > +++ b/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c
> > @@ -905,10 +905,12 @@ static void nilfs_fsck(const char *device)
> >        print_pseg_message(&pseg_ref, "    indicated partial segment");
> >        fputc('\n', stderr);
> >
> > +#if 0
> >        if (le16_to_cpu(sb.s_state) & NILFS_VALID_FS) {
> >                fprintf(stderr, "Clean FS.\n");
> >                goto out_clean;
> >        }
> > +#endif
> >
> >        if (nilfs_do_recovery(devfd, &pseg_ref) == 0)
> >                goto out;
> >

Re: Can't mount nilfs - error searching super root.

[Csaba Kos]

Hi!

Sorry to chime in uncalled, but I noticed that you are trying to mount
"/dev/sdb".
I have to admit that it has been a while since I last mounted a
pendrive from the
command line, so I might be wrong, but usually one mounts partitions
on the device,
 like "/dev/sdb1", and not the device itself.

Regards,

Csaba Kos

On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 6:38 PM, Milos Jana <milosdsax-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> user@laptop:~/prog/sources/nilfs-utils-2.0.6$ sudo fsck0.nilfs2 /dev/sdb
> [sudo] password for user:
> Super-block:
>   revision = 2.0, checksum = OK
>   blocksize = 4096
>   write time = 2008-12-28 09:48:42
>   indicated partial segment: blocknr = 4263936
>   segnum = 2082, seq = 11746, cno=6661
>
> empty or bad segment: segnum = 2082, blocknr = 4263936
> The latest segment is lost. Trying rollback recovery..
> .
> Searching the latest checkpoint.
> Selected segment: blocknr = 4261888
>   segnum = 2081, seq = 11745, cno=6660
>   creation time = 2008-12-28 09:48:34
> Do you wish to overwrite super block (y/N)? Y
> Recovery will complete on mount.
> user@laptop:~/prog/sources/nilfs-utils-2.0.6$ sudo mount /media/pendrive/
> mount.nilfs2: Error while mounting /dev/sdb on /media/pendrive: Invalid
> argument
>
> dmesg returns the same errors:
> [ 553.003240] NILFS warning: Segment magic number invalid
> [ 553.003248] NILFS: error searching super root.
>
> On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 8:55 AM, Ryusuke Konishi <ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:10:19 +0100, "Milos Jana" wrote:
>> > Nilfs-utils compiled properly with patch after following instructions
>> > from
>> > your previous post. Here is what came out:
>> >
>> > user@laptop:~$ sudo fsck0.nilfs2 /dev/sdb
>> > Super-block:
>> >   revision = 2.0, checksum = OK
>> >   blocksize = 4096
>> >   write time = 2008-12-28 09:48:42
>> >   indicated partial segment: blocknr = 4263936
>> >   segnum = 2082, seq = 11746, cno=6661
>> >
>> > Clean FS.
>> >
>> > user@laptop:~$ sudo mount /media/pendrive/
>> > mount.nilfs2: Error while mounting /dev/sdb on /media/pendrive: Invalid
>> > argument
>>
>> Hmm, that's weird.
>>
>> The partition was cleanly unmounted, but the final segment seems not
>> to be written to the disk.
>>
>> Maybe, we need 'force' option to treat such situation.
>>
>> In the meatime, could you try the following (additional) patch?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Ryusuke
>> --
>>
>> diff --git a/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c b/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c
>> index d3d335f..0d51e54 100644
>> --- a/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c
>> +++ b/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c
>> @@ -905,10 +905,12 @@ static void nilfs_fsck(const char *device)
>>        print_pseg_message(&pseg_ref, "    indicated partial segment");
>>        fputc('\n', stderr);
>>
>> +#if 0
>>        if (le16_to_cpu(sb.s_state) & NILFS_VALID_FS) {
>>                fprintf(stderr, "Clean FS.\n");
>>                goto out_clean;
>>        }
>> +#endif
>>
>>        if (nilfs_do_recovery(devfd, &pseg_ref) == 0)
>>                goto out;
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> users-JrjvKiOkagjYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org
> https://www.nilfs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>

Re: Can't mount nilfs - error searching super root.

[Ryusuke Konishi]

On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 19:22:46 +0900, "Csaba Kos" wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> Sorry to chime in uncalled, but I noticed that you are trying to mount
> "/dev/sdb".
> I have to admit that it has been a while since I last mounted a
> pendrive from the
> command line, so I might be wrong, but usually one mounts partitions
> on the device,
>  like "/dev/sdb1", and not the device itself.

No, no. That's OK.
NILFS does not overwrite the partition table block, so is available
for the device itself.
Of course, it's unless there's a bug for this usage ;)

Ryusuke
 
> Regards,
> 
> Csaba Kos
> 
> On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 6:38 PM, Milos Jana <milosdsax-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > user@laptop:~/prog/sources/nilfs-utils-2.0.6$ sudo fsck0.nilfs2 /dev/sdb
> > [sudo] password for user:
> > Super-block:
> >   revision = 2.0, checksum = OK
> >   blocksize = 4096
> >   write time = 2008-12-28 09:48:42
> >   indicated partial segment: blocknr = 4263936
> >   segnum = 2082, seq = 11746, cno=6661
> >
> > empty or bad segment: segnum = 2082, blocknr = 4263936
> > The latest segment is lost. Trying rollback recovery..
> > .
> > Searching the latest checkpoint.
> > Selected segment: blocknr = 4261888
> >   segnum = 2081, seq = 11745, cno=6660
> >   creation time = 2008-12-28 09:48:34
> > Do you wish to overwrite super block (y/N)? Y
> > Recovery will complete on mount.
> > user@laptop:~/prog/sources/nilfs-utils-2.0.6$ sudo mount /media/pendrive/
> > mount.nilfs2: Error while mounting /dev/sdb on /media/pendrive: Invalid
> > argument
> >
> > dmesg returns the same errors:
> > [ 553.003240] NILFS warning: Segment magic number invalid
> > [ 553.003248] NILFS: error searching super root.
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 8:55 AM, Ryusuke Konishi <ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:10:19 +0100, "Milos Jana" wrote:
> >> > Nilfs-utils compiled properly with patch after following instructions
> >> > from
> >> > your previous post. Here is what came out:
> >> >
> >> > user@laptop:~$ sudo fsck0.nilfs2 /dev/sdb
> >> > Super-block:
> >> >   revision = 2.0, checksum = OK
> >> >   blocksize = 4096
> >> >   write time = 2008-12-28 09:48:42
> >> >   indicated partial segment: blocknr = 4263936
> >> >   segnum = 2082, seq = 11746, cno=6661
> >> >
> >> > Clean FS.
> >> >
> >> > user@laptop:~$ sudo mount /media/pendrive/
> >> > mount.nilfs2: Error while mounting /dev/sdb on /media/pendrive: Invalid
> >> > argument
> >>
> >> Hmm, that's weird.
> >>
> >> The partition was cleanly unmounted, but the final segment seems not
> >> to be written to the disk.
> >>
> >> Maybe, we need 'force' option to treat such situation.
> >>
> >> In the meatime, could you try the following (additional) patch?
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Ryusuke
> >> --
> >>
> >> diff --git a/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c b/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c
> >> index d3d335f..0d51e54 100644
> >> --- a/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c
> >> +++ b/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c
> >> @@ -905,10 +905,12 @@ static void nilfs_fsck(const char *device)
> >>        print_pseg_message(&pseg_ref, "    indicated partial segment");
> >>        fputc('\n', stderr);
> >>
> >> +#if 0
> >>        if (le16_to_cpu(sb.s_state) & NILFS_VALID_FS) {
> >>                fprintf(stderr, "Clean FS.\n");
> >>                goto out_clean;
> >>        }
> >> +#endif
> >>
> >>        if (nilfs_do_recovery(devfd, &pseg_ref) == 0)
> >>                goto out;
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > users mailing list
> > users-JrjvKiOkagjYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org
> > https://www.nilfs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> users-JrjvKiOkagjYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org
> https://www.nilfs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: Can't mount nilfs - error searching super root.

[Milos Jana]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 338 bytes --]

On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 11:02 AM, Ryusuke Konishi <ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 10:38:16 +0100, Milos Jana wrote:
> Oops, use 'y' instead of 'Y'.
>
> This solved the problem, pendrive mounted successfuly and it looks like no
data was lost. Thanks for your help and hard work on NILFS development :)

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 620 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 158 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users-JrjvKiOkagjYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org
https://www.nilfs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: Can't mount nilfs - error searching super root.

[Csaba Kos]

On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 8:07 PM, Ryusuke Konishi wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 19:22:46 +0900, "Csaba Kos" wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> Sorry to chime in uncalled, but I noticed that you are trying to mount
>> "/dev/sdb".
>> I have to admit that it has been a while since I last mounted a
>> pendrive from the
>> command line, so I might be wrong, but usually one mounts partitions
>> on the device,
>>  like "/dev/sdb1", and not the device itself.
>
> No, no. That's OK.
> NILFS does not overwrite the partition table block, so is available
> for the device itself.
> Of course, it's unless there's a bug for this usage ;)
Ah, sorry, I didn't know about that and thank you for the heads up. So
sdb and sdb1 is basically equivalent for nilfs? Is this a
nilfs-specific feature?

Regards,

Csaba

>
> Ryusuke
>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Csaba Kos
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 6:38 PM, Milos Jana <milosdsax-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>> > user@laptop:~/prog/sources/nilfs-utils-2.0.6$ sudo fsck0.nilfs2 /dev/sdb
>> > [sudo] password for user:
>> > Super-block:
>> >   revision = 2.0, checksum = OK
>> >   blocksize = 4096
>> >   write time = 2008-12-28 09:48:42
>> >   indicated partial segment: blocknr = 4263936
>> >   segnum = 2082, seq = 11746, cno=6661
>> >
>> > empty or bad segment: segnum = 2082, blocknr = 4263936
>> > The latest segment is lost. Trying rollback recovery..
>> > .
>> > Searching the latest checkpoint.
>> > Selected segment: blocknr = 4261888
>> >   segnum = 2081, seq = 11745, cno=6660
>> >   creation time = 2008-12-28 09:48:34
>> > Do you wish to overwrite super block (y/N)? Y
>> > Recovery will complete on mount.
>> > user@laptop:~/prog/sources/nilfs-utils-2.0.6$ sudo mount /media/pendrive/
>> > mount.nilfs2: Error while mounting /dev/sdb on /media/pendrive: Invalid
>> > argument
>> >
>> > dmesg returns the same errors:
>> > [ 553.003240] NILFS warning: Segment magic number invalid
>> > [ 553.003248] NILFS: error searching super root.
>> >
>> > On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 8:55 AM, Ryusuke Konishi <ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:10:19 +0100, "Milos Jana" wrote:
>> >> > Nilfs-utils compiled properly with patch after following instructions
>> >> > from
>> >> > your previous post. Here is what came out:
>> >> >
>> >> > user@laptop:~$ sudo fsck0.nilfs2 /dev/sdb
>> >> > Super-block:
>> >> >   revision = 2.0, checksum = OK
>> >> >   blocksize = 4096
>> >> >   write time = 2008-12-28 09:48:42
>> >> >   indicated partial segment: blocknr = 4263936
>> >> >   segnum = 2082, seq = 11746, cno=6661
>> >> >
>> >> > Clean FS.
>> >> >
>> >> > user@laptop:~$ sudo mount /media/pendrive/
>> >> > mount.nilfs2: Error while mounting /dev/sdb on /media/pendrive: Invalid
>> >> > argument
>> >>
>> >> Hmm, that's weird.
>> >>
>> >> The partition was cleanly unmounted, but the final segment seems not
>> >> to be written to the disk.
>> >>
>> >> Maybe, we need 'force' option to treat such situation.
>> >>
>> >> In the meatime, could you try the following (additional) patch?
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >> Ryusuke
>> >> --
>> >>
>> >> diff --git a/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c b/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c
>> >> index d3d335f..0d51e54 100644
>> >> --- a/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c
>> >> +++ b/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c
>> >> @@ -905,10 +905,12 @@ static void nilfs_fsck(const char *device)
>> >>        print_pseg_message(&pseg_ref, "    indicated partial segment");
>> >>        fputc('\n', stderr);
>> >>
>> >> +#if 0
>> >>        if (le16_to_cpu(sb.s_state) & NILFS_VALID_FS) {
>> >>                fprintf(stderr, "Clean FS.\n");
>> >>                goto out_clean;
>> >>        }
>> >> +#endif
>> >>
>> >>        if (nilfs_do_recovery(devfd, &pseg_ref) == 0)
>> >>                goto out;
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > users mailing list
>> > users-JrjvKiOkagjYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org
>> > https://www.nilfs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>> >
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> users mailing list
>> users-JrjvKiOkagjYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org
>> https://www.nilfs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>

Re: Can't mount nilfs - error searching super root.

[Ryusuke Konishi]

On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 20:16:55 +0900, "Csaba Kos" wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 8:07 PM, Ryusuke Konishi wrote:
> > On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 19:22:46 +0900, "Csaba Kos" wrote:
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >> Sorry to chime in uncalled, but I noticed that you are trying to mount
> >> "/dev/sdb".
> >> I have to admit that it has been a while since I last mounted a
> >> pendrive from the
> >> command line, so I might be wrong, but usually one mounts partitions
> >> on the device,
> >>  like "/dev/sdb1", and not the device itself.
> >
> > No, no. That's OK.
> > NILFS does not overwrite the partition table block, so is available
> > for the device itself.
> > Of course, it's unless there's a bug for this usage ;)
> Ah, sorry, I didn't know about that and thank you for the heads up. So
> sdb and sdb1 is basically equivalent for nilfs?

No. If you did mkfs for sdb, the mount device must be sdb (not sdb1),
and the opposite is true.  So they differ.

> Is this a nilfs-specific feature?

I believe most filesystems can do this.
One of the merits to use device itself is that it can align the
disk area without inserting offset sectors.

Since performance of flash devices is often sensitive to alignment of
sectors, this style is occasionally used.

Cheers,
Ryusuke

> Regards,
> 
> Csaba
> 
> >
> > Ryusuke
> >
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Csaba Kos
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 6:38 PM, Milos Jana <milosdsax-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> >> > user@laptop:~/prog/sources/nilfs-utils-2.0.6$ sudo fsck0.nilfs2 /dev/sdb
> >> > [sudo] password for user:
> >> > Super-block:
> >> >   revision = 2.0, checksum = OK
> >> >   blocksize = 4096
> >> >   write time = 2008-12-28 09:48:42
> >> >   indicated partial segment: blocknr = 4263936
> >> >   segnum = 2082, seq = 11746, cno=6661
> >> >
> >> > empty or bad segment: segnum = 2082, blocknr = 4263936
> >> > The latest segment is lost. Trying rollback recovery..
> >> > .
> >> > Searching the latest checkpoint.
> >> > Selected segment: blocknr = 4261888
> >> >   segnum = 2081, seq = 11745, cno=6660
> >> >   creation time = 2008-12-28 09:48:34
> >> > Do you wish to overwrite super block (y/N)? Y
> >> > Recovery will complete on mount.
> >> > user@laptop:~/prog/sources/nilfs-utils-2.0.6$ sudo mount /media/pendrive/
> >> > mount.nilfs2: Error while mounting /dev/sdb on /media/pendrive: Invalid
> >> > argument
> >> >
> >> > dmesg returns the same errors:
> >> > [ 553.003240] NILFS warning: Segment magic number invalid
> >> > [ 553.003248] NILFS: error searching super root.
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 8:55 AM, Ryusuke Konishi <ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:10:19 +0100, "Milos Jana" wrote:
> >> >> > Nilfs-utils compiled properly with patch after following instructions
> >> >> > from
> >> >> > your previous post. Here is what came out:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > user@laptop:~$ sudo fsck0.nilfs2 /dev/sdb
> >> >> > Super-block:
> >> >> >   revision = 2.0, checksum = OK
> >> >> >   blocksize = 4096
> >> >> >   write time = 2008-12-28 09:48:42
> >> >> >   indicated partial segment: blocknr = 4263936
> >> >> >   segnum = 2082, seq = 11746, cno=6661
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Clean FS.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > user@laptop:~$ sudo mount /media/pendrive/
> >> >> > mount.nilfs2: Error while mounting /dev/sdb on /media/pendrive: Invalid
> >> >> > argument
> >> >>
> >> >> Hmm, that's weird.
> >> >>
> >> >> The partition was cleanly unmounted, but the final segment seems not
> >> >> to be written to the disk.
> >> >>
> >> >> Maybe, we need 'force' option to treat such situation.
> >> >>
> >> >> In the meatime, could you try the following (additional) patch?
> >> >>
> >> >> Regards,
> >> >> Ryusuke
> >> >> --
> >> >>
> >> >> diff --git a/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c b/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c
> >> >> index d3d335f..0d51e54 100644
> >> >> --- a/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c
> >> >> +++ b/sbin/mkfs/fsck0.nilfs2.c
> >> >> @@ -905,10 +905,12 @@ static void nilfs_fsck(const char *device)
> >> >>        print_pseg_message(&pseg_ref, "    indicated partial segment");
> >> >>        fputc('\n', stderr);
> >> >>
> >> >> +#if 0
> >> >>        if (le16_to_cpu(sb.s_state) & NILFS_VALID_FS) {
> >> >>                fprintf(stderr, "Clean FS.\n");
> >> >>                goto out_clean;
> >> >>        }
> >> >> +#endif
> >> >>
> >> >>        if (nilfs_do_recovery(devfd, &pseg_ref) == 0)
> >> >>                goto out;
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > users mailing list
> >> > users-JrjvKiOkagjYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org
> >> > https://www.nilfs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> >> >
> >> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> users mailing list
> >> users-JrjvKiOkagjYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org
> >> https://www.nilfs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> >

Re: Can't mount nilfs - error searching super root.

[Milos Jana]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1423 bytes --]

Hi again,

Looks like I'm unable to mount this drive again. It mounted successfully
several times after following your previous posts, but yesterday the problem
came back. I'm sure that I have been mounting/unmounting my pendrive
properly. This time fsck0.nilfs2 doesn't help - it hangs with "Searching the
latest checkpoint." message (see below).

user@laptop:~$ sudo mount /media/pendrive/
mount.nilfs2: Error while mounting /dev/sdb on /media/pendrive: Invalid
argument

user@laptop:~$ dmesg
...
[22429.446924] NILFS warning: Segment magic number invalid
[22429.446932] NILFS: error searching super root.

user@laptop:~/prog/sources/nilfs-utils-2.0.6$ sudo fsck0.nilfs2 /dev/sdb #
Nilfs-tools with first patch applied
Super-block:
  revision = 2.0, checksum = OK
  blocksize = 4096
  write time = 2009-01-22 23:40:19
  indicated partial segment: blocknr = 1966080
  segnum = 960, seq = 18266, cno=10169

Clean FS.

user@laptop:~/prog/sources/nilfs-utils-2.0.6$ sudo fsck0.nilfs2 /dev/sdb #
Nilfs-tools with additional patch applied
Super-block:
  revision = 2.0, checksum = OK
  blocksize = 4096
  write time = 2009-01-22 23:40:19
  indicated partial segment: blocknr = 1966080
  segnum = 960, seq = 18266, cno=10169

empty or bad segment: segnum = 960, blocknr = 1966080
The latest segment is lost. Trying rollback recovery..
.
Searching the latest checkpoint.    # here it hanged for like 10 minutes
until I killed it

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1658 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 158 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users-JrjvKiOkagjYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org
https://www.nilfs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: Can't mount nilfs - error searching super root.

[Milos Jana]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 103 bytes --]

Update: fsck0.nilfs returned this after long time:
fsck0.nilfs2: cannot read block (blocknr = 7831552)

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 121 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 158 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users-JrjvKiOkagjYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org
https://www.nilfs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: Can't mount nilfs - error searching super root.

[Ryusuke Konishi]

Hi,
On Sat, 24 Jan 2009 01:13:41 +0100, Milos Jana wrote:
> Hi again,
> 
> Looks like I'm unable to mount this drive again. It mounted successfully
> several times after following your previous posts, but yesterday the problem
> came back. I'm sure that I have been mounting/unmounting my pendrive
> properly.

Hmm, it's abnormal that this occurs so often.
The partition was cleanly unmounted, but the latest segment was not written.
The usb device seems to lack proper support of cache flushing if it
occurs just before power-off.

The usb stack of Linux is often problematic, but this looks terrific.
 
> This time fsck0.nilfs2 doesn't help - it hangs with "Searching the
> latest checkpoint." message (see below).

All right, I'll look into the hang problem.

Please note that the fsck0 is not a complete solution.
To make it better, we need a few changes on the disk format.

Regards,
Ryusuke

> user@laptop:~$ sudo mount /media/pendrive/
> mount.nilfs2: Error while mounting /dev/sdb on /media/pendrive: Invalid
> argument
> 
> user@laptop:~$ dmesg
> ...
> [22429.446924] NILFS warning: Segment magic number invalid
> [22429.446932] NILFS: error searching super root.
> 
> user@laptop:~/prog/sources/nilfs-utils-2.0.6$ sudo fsck0.nilfs2 /dev/sdb #
> Nilfs-tools with first patch applied
> Super-block:
>   revision = 2.0, checksum = OK
>   blocksize = 4096
>   write time = 2009-01-22 23:40:19
>   indicated partial segment: blocknr = 1966080
>   segnum = 960, seq = 18266, cno=10169
> 
> Clean FS.
> 
> user@laptop:~/prog/sources/nilfs-utils-2.0.6$ sudo fsck0.nilfs2 /dev/sdb #
> Nilfs-tools with additional patch applied
> Super-block:
>   revision = 2.0, checksum = OK
>   blocksize = 4096
>   write time = 2009-01-22 23:40:19
>   indicated partial segment: blocknr = 1966080
>   segnum = 960, seq = 18266, cno=10169
> 
> empty or bad segment: segnum = 960, blocknr = 1966080
> The latest segment is lost. Trying rollback recovery..
> .
> Searching the latest checkpoint.    # here it hanged for like 10 minutes
> until I killed it

Re: Can't mount nilfs - error searching super root.

[Milos Jana]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2402 bytes --]

Uhm... does it mean that data from my pendrive in unrecoverable? Is there
any chance that future release on fsck0.nilfs will be able to recover it?
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Ryusuke Konishi <ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> Hi,
> On Sat, 24 Jan 2009 01:13:41 +0100, Milos Jana wrote:
> > Hi again,
> >
> > Looks like I'm unable to mount this drive again. It mounted successfully
> > several times after following your previous posts, but yesterday the
> problem
> > came back. I'm sure that I have been mounting/unmounting my pendrive
> > properly.
>
> Hmm, it's abnormal that this occurs so often.
> The partition was cleanly unmounted, but the latest segment was not
> written.
> The usb device seems to lack proper support of cache flushing if it
> occurs just before power-off.
>
> The usb stack of Linux is often problematic, but this looks terrific.
>
> > This time fsck0.nilfs2 doesn't help - it hangs with "Searching the
> > latest checkpoint." message (see below).
>
> All right, I'll look into the hang problem.
>
> Please note that the fsck0 is not a complete solution.
> To make it better, we need a few changes on the disk format.
>
> Regards,
> Ryusuke
>
> > user@laptop:~$ sudo mount /media/pendrive/
> > mount.nilfs2: Error while mounting /dev/sdb on /media/pendrive: Invalid
> > argument
> >
> > user@laptop:~$ dmesg
> > ...
> > [22429.446924] NILFS warning: Segment magic number invalid
> > [22429.446932] NILFS: error searching super root.
> >
> > user@laptop:~/prog/sources/nilfs-utils-2.0.6$ sudo fsck0.nilfs2 /dev/sdb
> #
> > Nilfs-tools with first patch applied
> > Super-block:
> >   revision = 2.0, checksum = OK
> >   blocksize = 4096
> >   write time = 2009-01-22 23:40:19
> >   indicated partial segment: blocknr = 1966080
> >   segnum = 960, seq = 18266, cno=10169
> >
> > Clean FS.
> >
> > user@laptop:~/prog/sources/nilfs-utils-2.0.6$ sudo fsck0.nilfs2 /dev/sdb
> #
> > Nilfs-tools with additional patch applied
> > Super-block:
> >   revision = 2.0, checksum = OK
> >   blocksize = 4096
> >   write time = 2009-01-22 23:40:19
> >   indicated partial segment: blocknr = 1966080
> >   segnum = 960, seq = 18266, cno=10169
> >
> > empty or bad segment: segnum = 960, blocknr = 1966080
> > The latest segment is lost. Trying rollback recovery..
> > .
> > Searching the latest checkpoint.    # here it hanged for like 10 minutes
> > until I killed it
>

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 3234 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 158 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users-JrjvKiOkagjYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org
https://www.nilfs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: Can't mount nilfs - error searching super root.

[Milos Jana]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 769 bytes --]

I forgot to mention one important thing - there isn't really hang problem -
I just had to wait some long time until fsck0.nilfs returned "cannont read
block" error, it took so long probably because pendrive size is quite big
(32GB). So here is this is the full output:
user@laptop:~/prog/sources/nilfs-utils-2.0.6$ sudo fsck0.nilfs2 /dev/sdb #
Nilfs-tools with additional patch applied

Super-block:
  revision = 2.0, checksum = OK
  blocksize = 4096
  write time = 2009-01-22 23:40:19
  indicated partial segment: blocknr = 1966080
  segnum = 960, seq = 18266, cno=10169

empty or bad segment: segnum = 960, blocknr = 1966080

The latest segment is lost. Trying rollback recovery..

Searching the latest checkpoint.
fsck0.nilfs2: cannot read block (blocknr = 7831552)

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1032 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 158 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users-JrjvKiOkagjYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org
https://www.nilfs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: Can't mount nilfs - error searching super root.

[Ryusuke Konishi]

Hi,
On Wed, 11 Feb 2009 16:09:32 +0100, Milos Jana wrote:
> Uhm... does it mean that data from my pendrive in unrecoverable? Is there
> any chance that future release on fsck0.nilfs will be able to recover it?
> On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Ryusuke Konishi <ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org> wrote:

Oh, sorry. I once looked into the fsck0, but it was paused because I
had to do so many things.  I'll increase priority for this if you
really need it.  Meanwhile I'm worrying that the same trouble occurs
again and again even if fsck0 will be improved.

I feel we think removing the cause of the problem because
making better fsck will take some time.
And I wonder why the pendrive does not write all data for cleanly
unmounted partition so often.  It may need bugfix for the device driver,
for example it may have a silent error problem (i.e. it may complete
I/O operations even if it couldn't handle them properly).

Anyway, I will be able to back to fsck0 after a while.

Regards,
Ryusuke

> > Hi,
> > On Sat, 24 Jan 2009 01:13:41 +0100, Milos Jana wrote:
> > > Hi again,
> > >
> > > Looks like I'm unable to mount this drive again. It mounted successfully
> > > several times after following your previous posts, but yesterday the
> > problem
> > > came back. I'm sure that I have been mounting/unmounting my pendrive
> > > properly.
> >
> > Hmm, it's abnormal that this occurs so often.
> > The partition was cleanly unmounted, but the latest segment was not
> > written.
> > The usb device seems to lack proper support of cache flushing if it
> > occurs just before power-off.
> >
> > The usb stack of Linux is often problematic, but this looks terrific.
> >
> > > This time fsck0.nilfs2 doesn't help - it hangs with "Searching the
> > > latest checkpoint." message (see below).
> >
> > All right, I'll look into the hang problem.
> >
> > Please note that the fsck0 is not a complete solution.
> > To make it better, we need a few changes on the disk format.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ryusuke
> >
> > > user@laptop:~$ sudo mount /media/pendrive/
> > > mount.nilfs2: Error while mounting /dev/sdb on /media/pendrive: Invalid
> > > argument
> > >
> > > user@laptop:~$ dmesg
> > > ...
> > > [22429.446924] NILFS warning: Segment magic number invalid
> > > [22429.446932] NILFS: error searching super root.
> > >
> > > user@laptop:~/prog/sources/nilfs-utils-2.0.6$ sudo fsck0.nilfs2 /dev/sdb
> > #
> > > Nilfs-tools with first patch applied
> > > Super-block:
> > >   revision = 2.0, checksum = OK
> > >   blocksize = 4096
> > >   write time = 2009-01-22 23:40:19
> > >   indicated partial segment: blocknr = 1966080
> > >   segnum = 960, seq = 18266, cno=10169
> > >
> > > Clean FS.
> > >
> > > user@laptop:~/prog/sources/nilfs-utils-2.0.6$ sudo fsck0.nilfs2 /dev/sdb
> > #
> > > Nilfs-tools with additional patch applied
> > > Super-block:
> > >   revision = 2.0, checksum = OK
> > >   blocksize = 4096
> > >   write time = 2009-01-22 23:40:19
> > >   indicated partial segment: blocknr = 1966080
> > >   segnum = 960, seq = 18266, cno=10169
> > >
> > > empty or bad segment: segnum = 960, blocknr = 1966080
> > > The latest segment is lost. Trying rollback recovery..
> > > .
> > > Searching the latest checkpoint.    # here it hanged for like 10 minutes
> > > until I killed it
> >

Re: Can't mount nilfs - error searching super root.

[Milos Jana]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1449 bytes --]

Hi again,
Is it safe for me to try to mount my drive with current release of nilfs and
nilfs-utils? Release notes are quite short, I'm not sure if disk format
change may affect me and whether "Some reported bugs of userland tools were
fixed" also include "error searching super root" problem.
Regards, MJ

On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 7:34 AM, Ryusuke Konishi <ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> Hi,
> On Wed, 11 Feb 2009 16:09:32 +0100, Milos Jana wrote:
> > Uhm... does it mean that data from my pendrive in unrecoverable? Is there
> > any chance that future release on fsck0.nilfs will be able to recover it?
> > On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Ryusuke Konishi <ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org>
> wrote:
>
> Oh, sorry. I once looked into the fsck0, but it was paused because I
> had to do so many things.  I'll increase priority for this if you
> really need it.  Meanwhile I'm worrying that the same trouble occurs
> again and again even if fsck0 will be improved.
>
> I feel we think removing the cause of the problem because
> making better fsck will take some time.
> And I wonder why the pendrive does not write all data for cleanly
> unmounted partition so often.  It may need bugfix for the device driver,
> for example it may have a silent error problem (i.e. it may complete
> I/O operations even if it couldn't handle them properly).
>
> Anyway, I will be able to back to fsck0 after a while.
>
> Regards,
> Ryusuke
>
>
>

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 2024 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 158 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users-JrjvKiOkagjYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org
https://www.nilfs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: Can't mount nilfs - error searching super root.

[Ryusuke Konishi]

Hi!
On Wed, 22 Apr 2009 15:18:33 +0200, Milos Jana <milosdsax-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> Hi again,
> Is it safe for me to try to mount my drive with current release of nilfs and
> nilfs-utils? Release notes are quite short, I'm not sure if disk format
> change may affect me and whether "Some reported bugs of userland tools were
> fixed" also include "error searching super root" problem.
> Regards, MJ

The disk format compatibility is not broken for x86.  You can try the
latest nilfs2-utils and nilfs2-module.

Since the "error searching super root" problem is not a bug of mount
procedure but a result of incomplete disk write, it will occur for the
nilfs2 drive in question.

Even after you create a new partition with mkfs.nilfs2, it could be
reproduced if the device or (or the device driver) still has the
problem on sync write.  So please do not put valuable data on the
nilfs2 partition.

I'd like to know the root cause of the problem and take measures if I
can do something on file system layer.
I appreciate if you retry using nilfs on the device.

Thanks,
Ryusuke Konishi

> On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 7:34 AM, Ryusuke Konishi <ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> > On Wed, 11 Feb 2009 16:09:32 +0100, Milos Jana wrote:
> > > Uhm... does it mean that data from my pendrive in unrecoverable? Is there
> > > any chance that future release on fsck0.nilfs will be able to recover it?
> > > On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Ryusuke Konishi <ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > Oh, sorry. I once looked into the fsck0, but it was paused because I
> > had to do so many things.  I'll increase priority for this if you
> > really need it.  Meanwhile I'm worrying that the same trouble occurs
> > again and again even if fsck0 will be improved.
> >
> > I feel we think removing the cause of the problem because
> > making better fsck will take some time.
> > And I wonder why the pendrive does not write all data for cleanly
> > unmounted partition so often.  It may need bugfix for the device driver,
> > for example it may have a silent error problem (i.e. it may complete
> > I/O operations even if it couldn't handle them properly).
> >
> > Anyway, I will be able to back to fsck0 after a while.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ryusuke

Re: Can't mount nilfs - error searching super root.

[Milos Jana]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 992 bytes --]

Hi,
The same problem (error searching super root) occurred after one week of
using NILFS, this time the drive was formated and mounted with
nilfs/nilfs-utils version 2.0.12.


On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 4:44 PM, Ryusuke Konishi <ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> The disk format compatibility is not broken for x86.  You can try the
> latest nilfs2-utils and nilfs2-module.
>
> Since the "error searching super root" problem is not a bug of mount
> procedure but a result of incomplete disk write, it will occur for the
> nilfs2 drive in question.
>
> Even after you create a new partition with mkfs.nilfs2, it could be
> reproduced if the device or (or the device driver) still has the
> problem on sync write.  So please do not put valuable data on the
> nilfs2 partition.
>
> I'd like to know the root cause of the problem and take measures if I
> can do something on file system layer.
> I appreciate if you retry using nilfs on the device.
>
> Thanks,
> Ryusuke Konishi
>
>
>

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1424 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 158 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users-JrjvKiOkagjYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org
https://www.nilfs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: Can't mount nilfs - error searching super root.

[Milos Jana]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2685 bytes --]

The first patch modifies the file /fs/nilfs2/ioctl.c, while NILFS 2.0.12 and
current git version have this file located under the path /fs/ioctl.c.
Anyway, I have replaced all strings "/fs/nilfs/" with "/fs/", which allowed
me to apply the first patch, but the second one and compilation failed:

$ patch -p1 < patch1.patch
patching file fs/ioctl.c
Hunk #6 succeeded at 572 (offset -2 lines).
Hunk #7 succeeded at 606 (offset -2 lines).

$ patch -p1 < patch2.patch
patching file fs/ioctl.c
Hunk #1 FAILED at 25.
Hunk #5 FAILED at 432.
Hunk #6 succeeded at 448 (offset -2 lines).
Hunk #7 succeeded at 469 (offset -2 lines).
Hunk #8 succeeded at 478 (offset -2 lines).
Hunk #9 succeeded at 486 (offset -2 lines).
Hunk #10 succeeded at 506 (offset -2 lines).
2 out of 10 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file fs/ioctl.c.rej
patching file fs/nilfs.h
Hunk #1 succeeded at 245 (offset 9 lines).
patching file fs/segment.c
Hunk #1 succeeded at 2789 (offset 200 lines).
Hunk #2 succeeded at 2807 (offset 200 lines).
patching file fs/segment.h


$ make -j2
/home/user/temp/nilfs-2.0.12/fs/ioctl.c:434: error: conflicting types for
‘nilfs_ioctl_mark_blocks_dirty’
/home/user/temp/nilfs-2.0.12/fs/ioctl.c:394: error: previous definition of
‘nilfs_ioctl_mark_blocks_dirty’ was here
/home/user/temp/nilfs-2.0.12/fs/ioctl.c: In function
‘nilfs_ioctl_mark_blocks_dirty’:
/home/user/temp/nilfs-2.0.12/fs/ioctl.c:439: error:
‘nilfs_ioctl_do_mark_blocks_dirty’ undeclared (first use in this function)
/home/user/temp/nilfs-2.0.12/fs/ioctl.c:439: error: (Each undeclared
identifier is reported only once
/home/user/temp/nilfs-2.0.12/fs/ioctl.c:439: error: for each function it
appears in.)
/home/user/temp/nilfs-2.0.12/fs/ioctl.c: In function
‘nilfs_ioctl_prepare_clean_segments’:
/home/user/temp/nilfs-2.0.12/fs/ioctl.c:488: warning: passing argument 3 of
‘nilfs_ioctl_mark_blocks_dirty’ makes integer from pointer without a cast
/home/user/temp/nilfs-2.0.12/fs/ioctl.c:496: error: implicit declaration of
function ‘nilfs_ioctl_free_segments’
/home/user/temp/nilfs-2.0.12/fs/ioctl.c: In function
‘nilfs_ioctl_clean_segments’:
/home/user/temp/nilfs-2.0.12/fs/ioctl.c:544: error: implicit declaration of
function ‘memdup_user’
/home/user/temp/nilfs-2.0.12/fs/ioctl.c:545: warning: assignment makes
pointer from integer without a cast
make[3]: *** [/home/user/temp/nilfs-2.0.12/fs/ioctl.o] Error 1
make[2]: *** [_module_/home/user/temp/nilfs-2.0.12/fs] Error 2
make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-headers-2.6.27-10-generic'
make[1]: *** [default] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/user/temp/nilfs-2.0.12/fs'
make: *** [fs] Error 2

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 2816 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 158 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users-JrjvKiOkagjYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org
https://www.nilfs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: Can't mount nilfs - error searching super root.

[Ryusuke Konishi]

Hi,
On Mon, 11 May 2009 17:32:48 +0200, Milos Jana wrote:
> The first patch modifies the file /fs/nilfs2/ioctl.c, while NILFS 2.0.12 and
> current git version have this file located under the path /fs/ioctl.c.
> Anyway, I have replaced all strings "/fs/nilfs/" with "/fs/", which allowed
> me to apply the first patch, but the second one and compilation failed:
> 
> $ patch -p1 < patch1.patch
> patching file fs/ioctl.c
> Hunk #6 succeeded at 572 (offset -2 lines).
> Hunk #7 succeeded at 606 (offset -2 lines).
> 
> $ patch -p1 < patch2.patch
> patching file fs/ioctl.c
> Hunk #1 FAILED at 25.
> Hunk #5 FAILED at 432.
> Hunk #6 succeeded at 448 (offset -2 lines).
> Hunk #7 succeeded at 469 (offset -2 lines).
> Hunk #8 succeeded at 478 (offset -2 lines).
> Hunk #9 succeeded at 486 (offset -2 lines).
> Hunk #10 succeeded at 506 (offset -2 lines).
> 2 out of 10 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file fs/ioctl.c.rej
> patching file fs/nilfs.h
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 245 (offset 9 lines).
> patching file fs/segment.c
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 2789 (offset 200 lines).
> Hunk #2 succeeded at 2807 (offset 200 lines).
> patching file fs/segment.h

<snip>

Sorry for confusing you.

These patches I have recently posted on this mailing list is not
against out-of-tree modules but against linux-2.6.30-rc5 (i.e. Linus'
kernel tree). And, these will not solve your problem.

I'll apply corresponding patches to the nilfs2-module git tree after
Linus merged into the mainline.


Regards,
Ryusuke Konishi