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 (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id n0O3QgnN244586 for ; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 21:26:42 -0600 Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 04:22:10 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [xfs-masters] 2.6.29-rc: kernel BUG at fs/xfs/support/debug.c:108 Message-ID: <20090124032210.GA30366@lst.de> References: <20090110152803.GA7469@infradead.org> <20090110221459.GA8873@orion> <20090111104659.GB8071@disturbed> <20090112034550.GI8071@disturbed> <20090112211848.GL8071@disturbed> <20090120203319.GA7103@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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: Alexander Beregalov Cc: Christoph Hellwig , xfs-masters@oss.sgi.com, kernel-testers@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 09:34:36PM +0300, Alexander Beregalov wrote: > But I do not need LBD. Does XFS strongly require LBD? > Should I always turn it on even if I do not have files or devices of size 2Tb+ ? The bug is now fixed in the development tree, but until you upgrade to a kernel with the fix enabling CONFIG_LBD will keep you from hitting the bug. As you unfortunately noticed the !CONFIG_LBD case doesn't really get much test coverage, so I would personally recommend turning it on even if you don't need it. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs