From: Omar Sandoval <osandov@osandov.com>
To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: xfsdump confused by ino's < root ino
Date: Wed, 15 May 2019 13:53:14 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190515205314.GA4599@vader> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f37ae69d-39a6-b2d0-1cc9-806d1d597086@sandeen.net>
On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 03:51:07PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 5/15/19 3:47 PM, Omar Sandoval wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > We use xfsdump and xfsrestore (v3.1.7) to back up one of our storage
> > systems, and we ran into an issue where xfsdump prints the following for
> > a mount which isn't a bind mount:
> >
> > /sbin/xfsdump: NOTE: root ino 136 differs from mount dir ino 256, bind mount?
> >
> > Which also results in a crash from xfsrestore:
> >
> > xfsrestore: tree.c:757: tree_begindir: Assertion `ino != persp->p_rootino || hardh == persp->p_rooth' failed.
> >
> > Looking at [1], xfsdump uses bulkstat to get the minimum inode number on
> > the filesystem. But, at least one of our filesystems has a root inode
> > number of 256 and uses inode numbers 136-199, which tricks xfsdump into
> > thinking that the filesystem is bind mounted. Is this an invalid
> > assumption in xfsdump, or is it filesystem corruption?
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > 1: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfsdump-dev.git/commit/?id=25195ebf107dc81b1b7cea1476764950e1d6cc9d
>
> Yep, this is that heuristic going wrong. We (I) didn't realize that we could ever
> get inode numbers allocated which were less than the root inode, but alas.
>
> It's an invalid assumption in xfsdump. I guess we need to find a way
> out of this ... the goal was to detect bind mounts, but apparently
> the situation you have is more common than expected (well, we expected
> it to not exist ...)
>
> For now just using an older version of xfsdump should be a workaround,
> sorry about that.
>
> -Eric
Great, thanks for the confirmation!
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-15 20:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-15 20:47 xfsdump confused by ino's < root ino Omar Sandoval
2019-05-15 20:51 ` Eric Sandeen
2019-05-15 20:53 ` Omar Sandoval [this message]
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=20190515205314.GA4599@vader \
--to=osandov@osandov.com \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sandeen@redhat.com \
--cc=sandeen@sandeen.net \
/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