From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Wed, 03 Sep 2008 16:11:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.168.28]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m83NBBF0014421 for ; Wed, 3 Sep 2008 16:11:13 -0700 Received: from ipmail05.adl2.internode.on.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 7D900125FE14 for ; Wed, 3 Sep 2008 16:12:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ipmail05.adl2.internode.on.net (ipmail05.adl2.internode.on.net [203.16.214.145]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id PUSqMQRJwz5iwUFI for ; Wed, 03 Sep 2008 16:12:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 09:12:20 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: REVIEW: Zero rest of superblock sector always Message-ID: <20080903231220.GB15950@disturbed> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Barry Naujok Cc: "xfs@oss.sgi.com" On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 04:51:19PM +1000, Barry Naujok wrote: > I found that zeroing the "garbage" beyond the end of the superblock in > the first sector of each AG rather inconsistant. It depended on some > obscure combination of version bits to be set. Just for filling out hte history, that isfixing a bug in an old, old mkfs.xfs on Irix where a certain version failed to zero the superblock(s) before initialising them. Every XFS filesystem made in the last 10 years should have properly initialised superblocks. But still, doing it unconditionally is fine as it will fix stuff like fsfuzzer damage.... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com