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 4186129DF9 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2013 13:42:45 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay1.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A7968F8033 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2013 11:42:45 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <529F85B2.9090702@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2013 13:42:42 -0600 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs_repair: suggest reboot after dangerous repair References: <52826206.3080106@redhat.com> <20131204193822.GU1935@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <20131204193822.GU1935@sgi.com> 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: Ben Myers Cc: xfs-oss On 12/4/13, 1:38 PM, Ben Myers wrote: > On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:14:46AM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> If a "dangerous" repair (repair of a readonly mounted fs) >> has been done, suggest an immediate reboot upon completion. >> >> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen >> --- >> >> TBH, I don't know how "dangerous" dangerous is. Is this >> still required? > > Was there a crash or something after a repair that led to > this patch? > > Reviewed-by: Ben Myers > No, it was generated by a "bug" saying that it was impossible to run fsck.xfs on a root filesystem. That was largely an RTFM kind of thing but since it's normal for some systems to come up w/ RO-root in rescue mode, and people are used to being able to run e2fsck in that mode, it might be worth adding a little help to our tool to accomplish the same thing. -Eric _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs