From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Tue, 10 Apr 2007 14:18:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.lichtvoll.de (mondschein.lichtvoll.de [194.150.191.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id l3ALI4fB031461 for ; Tue, 10 Apr 2007 14:18:06 -0700 From: Martin Steigerwald Subject: Re: xfs_repair leaves empty but undeletable dirs in lost+found Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 22:45:00 +0200 References: <20070405162235.GA816@barkeeper1.linbit> <200704100151.LAA27963@larry.melbourne.sgi.com> <20070410092443.GA8496@barkeeper1.linbit> (sfid-20070410_134231_652510_049D094B) In-Reply-To: <20070410092443.GA8496@barkeeper1.linbit> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200704102245.00734.Martin@lichtvoll.de> Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Lars Ellenberg , Barry Naujok , xfs@oss.sgi.com Am Dienstag 10 April 2007 schrieb Lars Ellenberg: > > Would it be possible for you apply the patch I posted to xfs@oss > > in Feb http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2007-02/msg00072.html > > to the latest xfsprogs source, make and install it and run: > > > > # xfs_metadump /dev/md1 - | bzip2 > /tmp/bad_xfs.bz2 > > > > And make the image available for me to download and analyse? > > uhm. probably. I'll talk with the guy who owns the data :) > > out of curiosity: what exactly would you do with it? > I mean, would that be sufficient to restore the "badness", > with the files all filled with zero, > and you'd be able to reproduce locally? Hi Lars! As far as I understand a meta data dump does not contain the actual data in the files. That would be sufficient als xfs_repair is for repairing metadata corruption. For analysing the reason why a file is undeleteable its actual contents should be quite irrelevant. Only thing that could possibly matter is the amount and location, not the contents of blocks a file occupies. But that doesn't seem to matter here either. It would contain meta data information on the directory and file names as well as timestamps, owner and rights - if you are concerned about the privacy of your customer you may want to try to reproduce the problem with different meta data information. Regards, -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7