From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754966AbYKTMmd (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Nov 2008 07:42:33 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754460AbYKTMmY (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Nov 2008 07:42:24 -0500 Received: from mail.agmk.net ([91.192.224.71]:28883 "EHLO mail.agmk.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754459AbYKTMmX convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Nov 2008 07:42:23 -0500 To: "Neil Brown" Subject: Re: [2.6.27.6] jfs on raid1 => attempt to access beyond end of device. Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 14:42:16 +0200 X-Mailer: IlohaMail/0.8.13 (On: agmk.net) Message-ID: <5rbJChma.1227184936.9802590.pluto@agmk.net> In-Reply-To: <18725.19330.33584.355723@notabene.brown> From: "=?ISO-8859-2?Q?Pawe=B3?= Sikora" Bounce-To: "=?ISO-8859-2?Q?Pawe=B3?= Sikora" CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 20/11/2008, "Neil Brown" napisał/a: >Hi. > I sent this reply, but I bounced. I don't know why but I'm sending > it again a different way. Hopefully it will get through. > Please Cc any followup to linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org. I think the > email got through to the list. >NeilBrown > > > >On Thu, November 20, 2008 8:03 pm, Paweł Sikora wrote: >> hi, >> >> few hours ago i've set up jfs filesystems on raid1 and raid0. >> during restoring backup i've got an errors in dmesg. >> the testcase on my system is easy and 100% reproducible: >> just do the following command on jfs/raid1 device: >.... > >> /dev/sda2 * 748 2206 11719417+ fd Linux raid > ^^^^^^^^^ >size of sda2 is Kilobytes - 23438835 sectors. > > >> >> md0 : active raid1 sda2[0] sdb2[1] >> 11719296 blocks [2/2] [UU] > ^^^^^^^^ > >size of md0 in kilobytes - 23438592 sectors. > > >> [ 5583.796222] attempt to access beyond end of device >> [ 5583.796227] md0: rw=1, want=23438832, limit=23438592 >Largest 'want' value. > >'want' is just less than size of sda2 >'limit' is exactly size of md0 (no surprise there). > >> any ideas what's wrong? > >I suspect you created the filesystem on /dev/sda2, not realising >that when you created a raid1 from sda2 and sdb2 it would be slightly >smaller than sda2 (as md used up to 120K for metadata storage). thanks for the quick reply! afair i've ran mkfs.jfs on /dev/md/0. quick test... working raid0 device: # fsck.jfs -f -n /dev/md/1 fsck.jfs version 1.1.13, 17-Jul-2008 processing started: 11/20/2008 13.38.32 Filesystem is currently mounted. WARNING: Checking a mounted filesystem does not produce dependable results. The current device is: /dev/md/1 Block size in bytes: 4096 Filesystem size in blocks: 51757376 **Phase 0 - Replay Journal Log **Phase 1 - Check Blocks, Files/Directories, and Directory Entries **Phase 2 - Count links (...) failing raid1 device: # fsck.jfs -f -n -v /dev/md/0 fsck.jfs version 1.1.13, 17-Jul-2008 processing started: 11/20/2008 13.34.54 /dev/md/0 is mounted and the file system is not type JFS. (...) and the raw sda2 device: # fsck.jfs -f -n -v /dev/sda2 fsck.jfs version 1.1.13, 17-Jul-2008 processing started: 11/20/2008 13.34.50 The current device is: /dev/sda2 Open(...READ/WRITE EXCLUSIVE...) returned rc = 0 Invalid magic number in the superblock (P). Invalid magic number in the superblock (S). The superblock does not describe a correct jfs file system. (...)