Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762849AbXHWObm (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Aug 2007 10:31:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759215AbXHWObd (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Aug 2007 10:31:33 -0400 Received: from sovereign.computergmbh.de ([85.214.69.204]:34874 "EHLO sovereign.computergmbh.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759066AbXHWObc (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Aug 2007 10:31:32 -0400 Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 16:31:31 +0200 (CEST) From: Jan Engelhardt To: Martin Vogt cc: reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: fs corruption by doing nothing In-Reply-To: <46CD92B6.5090900@itwm.fraunhofer.de> Message-ID: References: <46CD92B6.5090900@itwm.fraunhofer.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3776 Lines: 124 On Aug 23 2007 15:59, Martin Vogt wrote: > >Its unclear if this is a knoppix bug, but reiserfs >simply tries to "correct something" which is wrong. I agree that this should not happen, especially not on RAID1 if the RAID superblock is of version 0.90 or 1.0. >>ReiserFS: sda2: found reiserfs format "3.6" with standard journal >>ReiserFS: sda2: using ordered data mode >>ReiserFS: sda2: warning: sh-461: journal_init: wrong transaction max size >>(144767). Changed to 1024 > >^^^^^^^^^^here > >>ReiserFS: sdb2: found reiserfs format "3.6" with standard journal >>ReiserFS: sdb2: using ordered data mode >>ReiserFS: sdb2: warning: sh-461: journal_init: wrong transaction max size >>(144767). Changed to 1024 > >^^^^^^^^^^here >After that the filesystem is completely broken. > >The setup: > >The fileserver is a mirror raid, two drives: > >>DEVICE /dev/sda1 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sda2 /dev/sdb2 >>ARRAY /dev/md0 level=raid1 num-devices=2 devices=/dev/sda1,/dev/sdb1 name=0 >>UUID=bd639458:60844c49:38db9f1f:61e51054 >>ARRAY /dev/md1 level=raid1 num-devices=2 devices=/dev/sda2,/dev/sdb2 name=1 >>UUID=016fdb8b:4d1e2ba7:9734a5c9:f4e84a24 > > >So knoppix should _not_ identify the drives in the fstab >(1. Error) >fstab: >># Added by KNOPPIX >>/dev/sda1 /media/sda1 ext3 noauto,users,exec 0 0 >># Added by KNOPPIX >>/dev/sda2 /media/sda2 reiserfs noauto,users,exec 0 0 >># Added by KNOPPIX >>/dev/sdb1 /media/sdb1 ext3 noauto,users,exec 0 0 >># Added by KNOPPIX >>/dev/sdb2 /media/sdb2 reiserfs noauto,users,exec 0 0 > >And reiserfs should not try to correct something, without >even issuing a mount command. >(2. Error) >>ReiserFS: sda2: warning: sh-461: journal_init: wrong transaction max size >>(144767). Changed to 1024 >>ReiserFS: sdb2: warning: sh-461: journal_init: wrong transaction max size >>(144767). Changed to 1024 I suppose someone did issue a mount. That is what mount -t auto /dev/foo /test will do - it tries all currently loaded filesystems. (And hence, an ext3 might get recognized as an ext2.) But at least, and thankfully, this will fail if the md device is already up. >This is the history of what I typed: > >root@Knoppix:/# history > 1 mdrun > 2 modprobe raid1 > 3 mdrun > 4 vgscan > 5 vgchange -a y > 6 mkdir /newroot > 7 mount /dev/system3/slash /newroot/ mdrun - what is that? >1: failed because the raid1 driver was missing >The other commands then bring up the root device, >but a chroot to /newroot fails. (filesystem completely >broken) > >Is this bug reproducible? >No. > > >I did the same procedure today for, I think 6 times or so, >this did all work. (same machine, clean raid,lvm,reiserfs) >I had this bug some weeks ago on another fileserver, with >different hardware. I thought, well ok. But now its >on this hardware the same, so there is really something >broken. > >>Linux Knoppix 2.6.19 #7 SMP PREEMPT Sun Dec 17 22:01:07 CET 2006 i686 >>GNU/Linux > >I had on this machine software irq lockups, which were gone >after a BIOS update and disable hyperthreading and L3 cache. >So maybe its preempt related too? Does knoppix use PREEMPT_BKL? >Even if knoppix should not be used as a rescue/live CD, then >the reiserfs module should not try to correct something, >this should be done by another tool.(fsck.reiserfs or a module option...) > >Well ok, the obvious workaround is not to use reiserfs >in a setup md->lvm->reiserfs. Maybe 4kstacks related (although very unlikely)? >Does XFS or ext3 has such problems? > >(dmesg as attachement) > >regards, Jan -- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/