From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Thu, 29 Mar 2007 05:07:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rgminet02.oracle.com (rgminet02.oracle.com [148.87.113.119]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id l2TC7X6p015022 for ; Thu, 29 Mar 2007 05:07:33 -0700 Received: from rgminet01.oracle.com (rgminet01.oracle.com [148.87.113.118]) by rgminet02.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.4/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id l2TBEgl4031466 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 29 Mar 2007 05:14:42 -0600 Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 13:14:07 +0200 From: Jens Axboe Subject: Re: Corrupt XFS -Filesystems on new Hardware and Kernel Message-ID: <20070329111407.GA9959@kernel.dk> References: <46094344.4090007@j-o-a.de> <20070328113141.GQ32597093@melbourne.sgi.com> <460A6298.4040702@j-o-a.de> <460A821B.4080308@sandeen.net> <460AC857.6040305@j-o-a.de> <460B068C.6060903@tlinx.org> <460B25BE.3050808@tlinx.org> <20070329093400.GB14616@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070329093400.GB14616@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Jan Kara Cc: Linda Walsh , Oliver Joa , Eric Sandeen , David Chinner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xfs-oss On Thu, Mar 29 2007, Jan Kara wrote: > > Oliver Joa wrote: > > >>eason or another, xfs has detected a corrupted on-disk inode format > > >>which it cannot recognize, and shuts down. > > ---- > > Oh, one other thing that may not apply in your case, but may. > > Does your SATA disk support write caching? Does it support > > something called a barrier function? (not real clear on all > > the ways this can go wrong, but I believe barriers are supposed > > to guarantee previous data has been fixed on disk (not in write > > cache). If the SATA controller issues a reset, it may very well > > purge the write cache. Theoretically, I can think of a _possibility_, > > that the reset disk would purge the write cache and the barrier > > indicator would tell xfs to resume writing. From a recent thread > > on the xfs list, it would appear this could be a "bad" thing (like > > crossing the streams ala "ghostbusters", but in a data-integrity > > context). > As far as I can remember, barrier does not mean that data is fixed on > disk. It is only a command that forces all the writes before the barrier > to be performed before all the writes after the barrier. So this is more > an ordering restriction than a data integrity thing... A barrier write guarentees both data before barrier is on disk, as well as the barrier itself when completion is signalled. -- Jens Axboe