From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EAFD7F63 for ; Sun, 6 Mar 2016 14:49:48 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay1.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 247F08F8035 for ; Sun, 6 Mar 2016 12:49:45 -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 5jeEvLvBnCdYBvvc for ; Sun, 06 Mar 2016 12:49:40 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 07:49:38 +1100 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: xfs resize: primary superblock is not updated immediately Message-ID: <20160306204938.GS30721@dastard> References: <20160222235628.GK25832@dastard> <20160223225926.GN25832@dastard> <20160229211628.GK29057@dastard> <20160301072011.GF30721@dastard> <20160303213108.GQ30721@dastard> 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 Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Alex Lyakas Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Danny Shavit , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 11:46:58AM +0200, Alex Lyakas wrote: > Hello Dave, > > On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:31 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 11:18:43AM +0200, Alex Lyakas wrote: > >> Hello Dave, > >> Thanks for the patch! I confirm that it fixes the scenario. > >> > >> At [1] please find all the blknos that are being used during the log > >> recovery (if that's of any interest). > > .... > >> Mar 3 11:17:41 vc-00-00-350-dev kernel: [ 68.129739] > >> _xfs_buf_find: blkno=200705 eofs=204800 >m_sb.sb_dblocks=25600 > >> Mar 3 11:17:41 vc-00-00-350-dev kernel: [ 68.129746] > >> _xfs_buf_find: blkno=200705 eofs=204800 >m_sb.sb_dblocks=25600 > > > > Where is the warning that this block is out of range? > Perhaps you are being confused by the ">" mark that appears in the > prints? This was definitely added by mistake, it appears on every > print. I apologize for that. > If not, then my understanding is that 200705 is still less than > 204800, so this block number is not out of range. And since we have > added the new pag structure, the issue is now fixed. Sorry, I misread it as 200480, not 204800. My fault, too much to do, brain mostly fried by other stuff. So the patch works. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs