From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Fri, 15 Feb 2008 20:41:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.168.28]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m1G4fVHM031787 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 20:41:32 -0800 Received: from sandeen.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id C75AFE364C4 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 20:41:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from sandeen.net (sandeen.net [209.173.210.139]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id huPkmAxRnNUr2XH7 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 20:41:56 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <47B66991.5040504@sandeen.net> Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 22:41:53 -0600 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Differences in mkfs.xfs and xfs_info output. References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Jan Derfinak Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com Jan Derfinak wrote: > Hello. > > I found following problem with xfs_info (xfs_grows -p xfs_info) command: > > # mkfs.xfs -f /dev/loop0 > meta-data=/dev/loop0 isize=256 agcount=4, agsize=32000 blks > = sectsz=512 attr=2 > data = bsize=4096 blocks=128000, imaxpct=25 > = sunit=0 swidth=0 blks > naming =version 2 bsize=4096 > log =internal log bsize=4096 blocks=1200, version=2 > = sectsz=512 sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=1 > realtime =none extsz=4096 blocks=0, rtextents=0 > # mount /dev/loop0 /mnt/usb > # xfs_info /mnt/usb > meta-data=/dev/loop0 isize=256 agcount=4, agsize=32000 blks > = sectsz=512 attr=0 > data = bsize=4096 blocks=128000, imaxpct=25 > = sunit=0 swidth=0 blks > naming =version 2 bsize=4096 > log =internal bsize=4096 blocks=1200, version=2 > = sectsz=512 sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=0 > realtime =none extsz=4096 blocks=0, rtextents=0 ... sorry for replying to my own thread 100 times, but... do you happen to have a 32-bit mkfs and a 64-bit kernrel? -Eric