From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Thu, 17 Jan 2008 15:46:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from larry.melbourne.sgi.com (larry.melbourne.sgi.com [134.14.52.130]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with SMTP id m0HNjr8V002327 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 15:45:55 -0800 Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 10:46:04 +1100 From: David Chinner Subject: Re: Repairing a possibly incomplete xfs_growfs command? Message-ID: <20080117234604.GG155407@sgi.com> References: <9CE70E6ED2C2F64FB5537A2973FA4F0253594C@pvn-3001.purevideo.local> <20080117030111.GH155259@sgi.com> <9CE70E6ED2C2F64FB5537A2973FA4F02535951@pvn-3001.purevideo.local> <20080117231517.GF155407@sgi.com> <9CE70E6ED2C2F64FB5537A2973FA4F0253595A@pvn-3001.purevideo.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9CE70E6ED2C2F64FB5537A2973FA4F0253595A@pvn-3001.purevideo.local> Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Mark Magpayo Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 03:29:17PM -0800, Mark Magpayo wrote: > This is quite a relief to know that this is a fairly straightforward > fix! What luck that you had encountered it recently, I really > appreciate the help. Here's my uname output: > > Linux purenas 2.6.16.55-c1 #1 SMP Fri Oct 19 16:45:15 EDT 2007 x86_64 > GNU/Linux > > Maybe you guys fixed the bug already? /me breathes a sigh of relief I think we have: http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=20f4ebf2bf2f57c1a9abb3655391336cc90314b3 [XFS] Make growfs work for amounts greater than 2TB > iirc, I may have run xfs_growfs with an older version of xfsprogs, then > was advised to update to the newest and try it again. I may have run it > on a version that still contained the bug? Kernel bug, not userspace bug, AFAICT. > So is this all I need then prior to an xfs_repair?: > > > # for i in `seq 0 1 63`; do > > > xfs_db -x -c "sb $i" -c 'write agcount 64' -c 'write dblock 4761733120' > > /dev/vg0/lv0 Yes, I think that is all that is necessary (that+repair was what fixed the problem at the customer site successfully). Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner Principal Engineer SGI Australian Software Group