From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB4907CDF for ; Tue, 15 Mar 2016 19:34:50 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by relay3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4564EAC001 for ; Tue, 15 Mar 2016 17:34:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sandeen.net (sandeen.net [63.231.237.45]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 9DYNztOCb7FP46xK for ; Tue, 15 Mar 2016 17:34:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Liberator.local (liberator [10.0.0.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sandeen.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0A21E481F for ; Tue, 15 Mar 2016 19:34:42 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: new fs, xfs_admin new label, metadata corruption detected References: From: Eric Sandeen Message-ID: <56E8AA22.7080301@sandeen.net> Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 19:34:42 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 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 Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: xfs@oss.sgi.com On 3/15/16 6:08 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > Is this expected? File system continues to work OK, sha256sum on the > single file on this fs matches the source, but the metadata corruption > messages are a bit scary so figured I'd ask about it. > > Filesystem created with > xfsprogs-4.3.0-1.fc23 > kernel-4.4.4-300.fc23.x86_64 > > mkfs.xfs defaults used on an LVM thinly provisioned volume on a single > spinning disk. > > # xfs_info /dev/mapper/VG-testxfs > meta-data=/dev/mapper/VG-testxfs isize=512 agcount=23, agsize=399984 blks ^^^^^^^^^^ It seems that you left a growfs step out of it, where does that come in to the testcase? -Eric _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs