From: Martin Steigerwald <Martin@Lichtvoll.de>
To: linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Badness in key lookup (length)
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 23:02:55 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200811252302.55944.Martin@Lichtvoll.de> (raw)
Hi!
I also checked my / XFS filesystem after that failed attempt to hibernate
via TuxOnIce (see my mail "truncated files"). Well BTW this happened on a
ThinkPad T42.
While /home was fine, / had some rather minor - it seems - issues. Whether
they have been from today or from whenever - I do not know.
xfs_check had stuff like
agi unlinked bucket 0 is 8620800 in ag 0 (inode=8620800)
agi unlinked bucket 1 is 1181377 in ag 0 (inode=1181377)
agi unlinked bucket 2 is 8628866 in ag 0 (inode=8628866)
agi unlinked bucket 3 is 8620611 in ag 0 (inode=8620611)
agi unlinked bucket 4 is 1181380 in ag 0 (inode=1181380)
agi unlinked bucket 5 is 7711173 in ag 0 (inode=7711173)
agi unlinked bucket 6 is 7711174 in ag 0 (inode=7711174)
[...]
allocated inode 207025 has 0 link count
allocated inode 207029 has 0 link count
allocated inode 207118 has 0 link count
allocated inode 7711173 has 0 link count
allocated inode 7711174 has 0 link count
allocated inode 7711197 has 0 link count
Which are due to references to deleted files AFAIK.
But there also was:
allocated inode 17686884 has 0 link count
link count mismatch for inode 23955806 (name ?), nlink 28, counted 29
allocated inode 23971992 has 0 link count
[...]
allocated inode 36427654 has 0 link count
link count mismatch for inode 35553563 (name ?), nlink 0, counted 1
allocated inode 34329742 has 0 link count
And xfs_repair -n showed:
Phase 1 - find and verify superblock...
Phase 2 - using internal log
- zero log...
- scan filesystem freespace and inode maps...
- found root inode chunk
Phase 3 - for each AG...
- scan and clear agi unlinked lists...
error following ag 0 unlinked list
error following ag 2 unlinked list
error following ag 3 unlinked list
- process known inodes and perform inode discovery...
- agno = 0
b796fb90: Badness in key lookup (length)
bp=(bno 21440, len 16384 bytes) key=(bno 21440, len 8192 bytes)
b796fb90: Badness in key lookup (length)
bp=(bno 29872, len 16384 bytes) key=(bno 29872, len 8192 bytes)
b796fb90: Badness in key lookup (length)
bp=(bno 84512, len 16384 bytes) key=(bno 84512, len 8192 bytes)
b796fb90: Badness in key lookup (length)
bp=(bno 91728, len 16384 bytes) key=(bno 91728, len 8192 bytes)
b796fb90: Badness in key lookup (length)
bp=(bno 97728, len 16384 bytes) key=(bno 97728, len 8192 bytes)
b796fb90: Badness in key lookup (length)
bp=(bno 100208, len 16384 bytes) key=(bno 100208, len 8192 bytes)
b796fb90: Badness in key lookup (length)
bp=(bno 100256, len 16384 bytes) key=(bno 100256, len 8192 bytes)
b796fb90: Badness in key lookup (length)
[...]
- agno = 1
b47ffb90: Badness in key lookup (length)
bp=(bno 15007344, len 16384 bytes) key=(bno 15007344, len 8192 bytes)
b47ffb90: Badness in key lookup (length)
bp=(bno 15009728, len 16384 bytes) key=(bno 15009728, len 8192 bytes)
b47ffb90: Badness in key lookup (length)
bp=(bno 15020000, len 16384 bytes) key=(bno 15020000, len 8192 bytes)
b47ffb90: Badness in key lookup (length)
bp=(bno 15044480, len 16384 bytes) key=(bno 15044480, len 8192 bytes)
b47ffb90: Badness in key lookup (length)
[...]
- agno = 2
b796fb90: Badness in key lookup (length)
bp=(bno 21986088, len 16384 bytes) key=(bno 21986088, len 8192 bytes)
b796fb90: Badness in key lookup (length)
bp=(bno 22240200, len 16384 bytes) key=(bno 22240200, len 8192 bytes)
b796fb90: Badness in key lookup (length)
bp=(bno 22374744, len 16384 bytes) key=(bno 22374744, len 8192 bytes)
b796fb90: Badness in key lookup (length)
bp=(bno 23118072, len 16384 bytes) key=(bno 23118072, len 8192 bytes)
b796fb90: Badness in key lookup (length)
bp=(bno 23133528, len 16384 bytes) key=(bno 23133528, len 8192 bytes)
b796fb90: Badness in key lookup (length)
bp=(bno 26478456, len 16384 bytes) key=(bno 26478456, len 8192 bytes)
- agno = 3
- process newly discovered inodes...
Phase 4 - check for duplicate blocks...
- setting up duplicate extent list...
- check for inodes claiming duplicate blocks...
- agno = 0
- agno = 1
- agno = 2
- agno = 3
Phase 5 - rebuild AG headers and trees...
- reset superblock...
Phase 6 - check inode connectivity...
- resetting contents of realtime bitmap and summary inodes
- traversing filesystem ...
- traversal finished ...
- moving disconnected inodes to lost+found ...
disconnected inode 29078, moving to lost+found
disconnected inode 42896, moving to lost+found
disconnected inode 42930, moving to lost+found
disconnected inode 53518, moving to lost+found
[...]
disconnected inode 35447288, moving to lost+found
disconnected inode 35447289, moving to lost+found
disconnected dir inode 35553563, moving to lost+found
disconnected inode 35756686, moving to lost+found
disconnected inode 36427654, moving to lost+found
[...]
Phase 7 - verify and correct link counts...
resetting inode 35553563 nlinks from 0 to 2
done
Running xfs_repair -n after that yielded yet another issue - although
everything should be fixed:
Phase 1 - find and verify superblock...
Phase 2 - using internal log
- scan filesystem freespace and inode maps...
- found root inode chunk
Phase 3 - for each AG...
- scan (but don't clear) agi unlinked lists...
- process known inodes and perform inode discovery...
- agno = 0
- agno = 1
- agno = 2
- agno = 3
- process newly discovered inodes...
Phase 4 - check for duplicate blocks...
- setting up duplicate extent list...
- check for inodes claiming duplicate blocks...
- agno = 0
- agno = 1
- agno = 2
- agno = 3
No modify flag set, skipping phase 5
Phase 6 - check inode connectivity...
- traversing filesystem ...
- traversal finished ...
- moving disconnected inodes to lost+found ...
Phase 7 - verify link counts...
would have reset inode 94530 nlinks from 2 to 3
No modify flag set, skipping filesystem flush and exiting.
Another xfs_repair fixed this one for good.
Lost+found is impressive - but my bet is that its all those previously
deleted files that xfs_repair "fixed" - disk usage appears to be where I
expect it to be and I do not "miss" anything yet:
shambhala:~> du -sch /lost+found
151M /lost+found
151M insgesamt
My questions:
1) Whats those Badness in key lookup messages? Anything to worry about?
2) Why did xfs_repair -n after I ran xfs_repair yield yet another
error "would have reset inode 94530 nlinks from 2 to 3"? Why didn't it
appear in the first pass?
martin@shambhala:~/Zeit/xfs-probleme-2008-11-25> grep 94530
xfsrepair-sda1-repair.txt
martin@shambhala:~/Zeit/xfs-probleme-2008-11-25#1>
3) Any idea how these problems occured in the first time?
Well I did not grab a metadump as I was just concerned to get anything up
and running ASAP. So if you can't say much, thats fair enough. I have
complete outputs of xfs_check and the different xfs_repair runs at hand
tough and could upload them to my webserver somewhere.
shambhala:~> xfs_info /dev/sda1
meta-data=/dev/disk/by-uuid/7fcd9766-bf1a-426a-8a07-2c3e0c510898 isize=256
agcount=4, agsize=915703 blks
= sectsz=512 attr=2
data = bsize=4096 blocks=3662812, imaxpct=25
= sunit=0 swidth=0 blks
naming =version 2 bsize=4096
log =internal bsize=4096 blocks=32768, version=2
= sectsz=512 sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=1
realtime =none extsz=4096 blocks=0, rtextents=0
shambhala:~#1> cat /proc/version
Linux version 2.6.27.7-tp42-toi-3.0-rc7a (martin@shambhala) (gcc version
4.3.2 (Debian 4.3.2-1) ) #1 PREEMPT Mon Nov 24 11:30:39 CET 2008
xfsprogs 2.9.8-1 (debian package)
Ciao,
--
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next reply other threads:[~2008-11-25 22:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-11-25 22:02 Martin Steigerwald [this message]
2008-11-26 0:11 ` Badness in key lookup (length) Barry Naujok
2008-11-26 8:58 ` Martin Steigerwald
2008-11-26 0:50 ` Timothy Shimmin
2008-11-26 8:51 ` Martin Steigerwald
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-11-25 22:03 Martin Steigerwald
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200811252302.55944.Martin@Lichtvoll.de \
--to=martin@lichtvoll.de \
--cc=linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox