From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id p1KLC7rY104900 for ; Sun, 20 Feb 2011 15:12:07 -0600 Received: from mail.sandeen.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id E644D2EC1F0 for ; Sun, 20 Feb 2011 13:14:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.sandeen.net (sandeen.net [63.231.237.45]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id S6zei36s3HBrlEyK for ; Sun, 20 Feb 2011 13:14:48 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4D618447.20101@sandeen.net> Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 15:14:47 -0600 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: First 128KB of XFS partition is NULL. References: 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 Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Ajeet Yadav Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On 2/19/11 8:45 PM, Ajeet Yadav wrote: > Testing team provides a very little information, but after checking > all possiblity I cam to conclusion that he may have removed the USB > during formating when mkfs.xfs just finished "Zero out the beginning > of the device, to obliterate any old filesystem signatures out there" That sounds plausible... Just for reference, there are runtime checks to be sure we don't overwrite block zero due to bad mappings; see "Access to block zero" message in xfs_cmn_err_fsblock_zero() and xfs_bmap_search_extents() -Eric _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs