public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: Disconnected inodes after test xfs/261
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 11:56:14 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141218105614.GE13705@quack.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141218103642.GB13705@quack.suse.cz>

On Thu 18-12-14 11:36:42, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Thu 18-12-14 08:02:26, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 08:35:35PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > >   Hello,
> > > 
> > >   in my test KVM with today's Linus' kernel I'm getting xfs_repair
> > > complaint about disconnected inodes after the test xfs/261 finishes
> > > (with success). xfs_repair output is like:
> > > xfs_repair -n /dev/vdb2
> > > 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 ...
> > > disconnected inode 132, would move to lost+found
> > > disconnected inode 133, would move to lost+found
> > > Phase 7 - verify link counts...
> > > No modify flag set, skipping filesystem flush and exiting.
> > > ---
> > > Given how trivial test xfs/261 is, it seems like created private mtab files
> > > that also get unlinked don't get added to AGI unlinked list before umount.
> > > I didn't have a detailed look whether that's possible or not and probably
> > > won't get to it before Christmas. So I'm sending this just in case someone
> > > more knowledgeable has ideas earlier...
> > 
> > I don't see that here. If you mount/unmount the filesystem, does the
> > warning go away? i.e. xfs_repair -n ignores the contents of
> > the log, so if the unlinked list transactions are in the log then
> > log recovery will make everything good again.
>   No, the problem is still there after mounting and unmounting the
> filesystem.
> 
> Given what Michael wrote: I'm running xfs_repair version 3.2.1, filesystem
> is V4.
  Oh, and what might be related: Test xfs/071 passes but xfs_repair
complains like:
*** xfs_repair -n output ***
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
inode 131 - extent offset too large - start 14, count 1, offset 2251799813685247
correcting nextents for inode 131
bad data fork in inode 131
would have cleared inode 131
        - 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
entry "071" in shortform directory 128 references free inode 131
would have junked entry "071" in directory inode 128
inode 131 - extent offset too large - start 14, count 1, offset 2251799813685247
correcting nextents for inode 131
bad data fork in inode 131
would have cleared inode 131
        - agno = 1
        - agno = 2
        - agno = 3
No modify flag set, skipping phase 5
Phase 6 - check inode connectivity...
        - traversing filesystem ...
entry "071" in shortform directory inode 128 points to free inode 131
would junk entry
        - traversal finished ...
        - moving disconnected inodes to lost+found ...
Phase 7 - verify link counts...
No modify flag set, skipping filesystem flush and exiting.

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

  reply	other threads:[~2014-12-18 10:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-12-17 19:35 Disconnected inodes after test xfs/261 Jan Kara
2014-12-17 21:02 ` Dave Chinner
2014-12-18  0:46   ` Michael L. Semon
2014-12-18 10:36   ` Jan Kara
2014-12-18 10:56     ` Jan Kara [this message]
2014-12-18 21:27       ` Eric Sandeen
2014-12-18 13:55     ` Jan Kara
2014-12-19  2:03       ` Dave Chinner
2014-12-21 23:41         ` Michael L. Semon
2014-12-18 21:21   ` Michael L. Semon
2014-12-18 21:54     ` Jan Kara

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=20141218105614.GE13705@quack.suse.cz \
    --to=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=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