From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay2.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.29]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45F057F37 for ; Sun, 17 Nov 2013 13:56:30 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22A42304032 for ; Sun, 17 Nov 2013 11:56:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net (ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net [150.101.137.129]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 2KHPkiDXhhtMu1MG for ; Sun, 17 Nov 2013 11:56:28 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 06:56:14 +1100 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] xfsprogs: suggest "-d" option for repair of RO mount Message-ID: <20131117195614.GU6188@dastard> References: <528261AD.50501@redhat.com> <20131113125921.GC24615@orion.maiolino.org> <52851CA9.8080903@sandeen.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <52851CA9.8080903@sandeen.net> 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 Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Eric Sandeen Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 12:55:37PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 11/13/13, 6:59 AM, Carlos Maiolino wrote: > > Hm, even in single user with a RO root filesystem, changing filesystem > > on-disk filesystem structures without have them replied in memory looks > > dangerous to me, you will keep data consistency since the fs is RO, but how > > about memory? You might have a discrepancy between memory and disk metadata > > contents causing in-memory only problems? > > > > The possibility is already there; it's just a question of whether we > suggest using it. And my other patch suggests an immediate reboot > when it's done, for just those reasons. If you make the suggestion of using -d, then it should mention at that point in time it's dangerous. > A user needs some way to repair their root disk if they can't boot > a rescue environment... and ext2/3/4 have been doing this since forever. > > I know, none of the above are exactly arguments that its' safe... :) Right, so let's make sure we don't give people any impression it is safe :) > >> +_("Unmount or use -d to repair a read-only mounted filesystem\n")); _("Unmount or use the dangerous (-d) option to repair a read-only mounted filesystem\n")); Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs