From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AF8FC3A5A6 for ; Thu, 19 Sep 2019 10:49:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BAEC21929 for ; Thu, 19 Sep 2019 10:49:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2388342AbfISKtJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Sep 2019 06:49:09 -0400 Received: from mail.cn.fujitsu.com ([183.91.158.132]:13565 "EHLO heian.cn.fujitsu.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2387987AbfISKtI (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Sep 2019 06:49:08 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.64,523,1559491200"; d="scan'208";a="75706467" Received: from unknown (HELO cn.fujitsu.com) ([10.167.33.5]) by heian.cn.fujitsu.com with ESMTP; 19 Sep 2019 18:49:06 +0800 Received: from G08CNEXCHPEKD02.g08.fujitsu.local (unknown [10.167.33.83]) by cn.fujitsu.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAC394CE14E7; Thu, 19 Sep 2019 18:49:03 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.167.220.84] (10.167.220.84) by G08CNEXCHPEKD02.g08.fujitsu.local (10.167.33.89) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.439.0; Thu, 19 Sep 2019 18:49:03 +0800 Subject: Re: question of xfs/148 and xfs/149 To: "Darrick J. Wong" CC: Zorro Lang , "fstests@vger.kernel.org" , xfs References: <4BF2FD5A942B1C4B828DDAF5635768C1041AB0E2@G08CNEXMBPEKD02.g08.fujitsu.local> <20190917163933.GC736475@magnolia> <20190918025915.GK7239@dhcp-12-102.nay.redhat.com> <7b5d5797-afff-90bc-0131-38fd13eced34@cn.fujitsu.com> <20190918163711.GX2229799@magnolia> From: Yang Xu Message-ID: <638537d9-ce38-7285-c598-8637adbebd8f@cn.fujitsu.com> Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 18:49:03 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190918163711.GX2229799@magnolia> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gbk"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.167.220.84] X-yoursite-MailScanner-ID: CAC394CE14E7.AFE9C X-yoursite-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-yoursite-MailScanner-From: xuyang2018.jy@cn.fujitsu.com Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org on 2019/09/19 0:37, Darrick J. Wong wrote: >> I am finding the reasion. It seems wipefs wipes important information and >> $DSIZE option(using single agcount or dsize, it also fails ) can not format >> disk completely. If we use other options, it can pass. > How does mkfs fail, specifically? > > Also, what's your storage configuration? And lsblk -D output? I only guess it from result. Even though, mkfs.xfs $DSIZE successfully($? is 0), but UUID mismatch in 030.full, so it may format the first superblock failed. This is just my guess. From your detailed explanation, I understand why it fails. Thanks Yang Xu