From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id mAQ8v0at029406 for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 02:57:00 -0600 Received: from mail.lichtvoll.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 2B3CD160345A for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 00:56:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.lichtvoll.de (mondschein.lichtvoll.de [194.150.191.11]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id mQfUeC2KyptTIjED for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 00:56:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from shambala.of.teamix.net (blackhole.teamix.net [194.150.191.251]) by mail.lichtvoll.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0E23B5AE36 for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 09:51:59 +0100 (CET) From: Martin Steigerwald Subject: Re: Badness in key lookup (length) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 09:51:58 +0100 References: <200811252302.55944.Martin@Lichtvoll.de> <492C9D65.2080302@sgi.com> (sfid-20081126_093700_023988_A1E7DD35) In-Reply-To: <492C9D65.2080302@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200811260951.58472.Martin@lichtvoll.de> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: xfs@oss.sgi.com Am Mittwoch 26 November 2008 schrieb Timothy Shimmin: > Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > 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. > > Yep, inodes which were unlinked but still had references to them > when the filesystem was taken down without cleanly unmounting. > There is a hash table of buckets which point to linked lists of > unlinked inodes. These are then supposed to be cleaned up during the > log-replay stage on mount. > I presume (sorry for asking but just checking :-) that you mounted the > filesystem first - you would have gotten an error message if there was > a dirty log anyway. And if you didn't mount first, did you get the > error message? Just curious. I did mount first ;-). I know its better to avoid xfs_repair -L ;-) Indeed it was not unmounted cleanly: Nov 25 13:16:39 shambhala kernel: XFS mounting filesystem sda5 Nov 25 13:16:39 shambhala kernel: Starting XFS recovery on filesystem: sda5 (logdev: internal) Nov 25 13:16:39 shambhala kernel: Ending XFS recovery on filesystem: sda5 (logdev: internal) I wonder about those "Badness in key lookup (length)" messages of xfs_repair 2.9.8 touch. -- 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