From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay2.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.29]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BA957F3F for ; Wed, 17 Dec 2014 18:46:42 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A6BF30406B for ; Wed, 17 Dec 2014 16:46:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qa0-f49.google.com (mail-qa0-f49.google.com [209.85.216.49]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id SzlZO9zD3zGzKuty (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 17 Dec 2014 16:46:37 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qa0-f49.google.com with SMTP id s7so132110qap.22 for ; Wed, 17 Dec 2014 16:46:37 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <549223D9.5020202@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 19:46:17 -0500 From: "Michael L. Semon" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Disconnected inodes after test xfs/261 References: <20141217193535.GA8231@quack.suse.cz> <20141217210226.GY24183@dastard> In-Reply-To: <20141217210226.GY24183@dastard> 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: Dave Chinner , Jan Kara Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On 12/17/14 16:02, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 08:35:35PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: >> Hello, >> >> in my test KVM with today's Linus' kernel I'm getting xfs_repair >> complaint about disconnected inodes after the test xfs/261 finishes >> (with success). xfs_repair output is like: >> xfs_repair -n /dev/vdb2 >> Phase 1 - find and verify superblock... >> Phase 2 - using internal log >> - scan filesystem freespace and inode maps... >> - found root inode chunk >> Phase 3 - for each AG... >> - scan (but don't clear) agi unlinked lists... >> - process known inodes and perform inode discovery... >> - agno = 0 >> - agno = 1 >> - agno = 2 >> - agno = 3 >> - process newly discovered inodes... >> Phase 4 - check for duplicate blocks... >> - setting up duplicate extent list... >> - check for inodes claiming duplicate blocks... >> - agno = 0 >> - agno = 1 >> - agno = 2 >> - agno = 3 >> No modify flag set, skipping phase 5 >> Phase 6 - check inode connectivity... >> - traversing filesystem ... >> - traversal finished ... >> - moving disconnected inodes to lost+found ... >> disconnected inode 132, would move to lost+found >> disconnected inode 133, would move to lost+found >> Phase 7 - verify link counts... >> No modify flag set, skipping filesystem flush and exiting. >> --- >> Given how trivial test xfs/261 is, it seems like created private mtab files >> that also get unlinked don't get added to AGI unlinked list before umount. >> I didn't have a detailed look whether that's possible or not and probably >> won't get to it before Christmas. So I'm sending this just in case someone >> more knowledgeable has ideas earlier... > > I don't see that here. If you mount/unmount the filesystem, does the > warning go away? i.e. xfs_repair -n ignores the contents of > the log, so if the unlinked list transactions are in the log then > log recovery will make everything good again. > > That said, if unmount is not leaving the log clean, then we've still > got an issue we need to get to the bottom of. > > Cheers, > > Dave. I've seen this but seemingly only on v4-superblock XFS and only with Dave's xfsprogs RFC libxfs patches applied. [Nice patchset, BTW.] Will `git pull` everything again, then take it home to the x86 dungeon and test it again. Good luck! Michael _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs