On 2/16/15 10:00 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > Am 16.02.2015 um 16:50 schrieb Eric Sandeen: >> On 2/16/15 4:30 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: >>> /dev/sda1 is a ordinary partition containing only /boot >>> why does the kernel report it is in use? >>> if that would be true it could not be unmounted >>> ___________________________________________ >>> >>> [root@asterisk:~]$ /usr/sbin/fsck.ext4 -f /dev/sda1 >>> e2fsck 1.42.12 (29-Aug-2014) >>> /dev/sda1 is in use. >>> e2fsck: Cannot continue, aborting. >> >> I just saw a similar report on #ext4; do you still have a jbd >> thread running for this filesystem? > > this is a ext2 filesystem > > [root@mail-gw:~]$ ps aux | grep jbd > root 203 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? S Feb15 0:00 [jbd2/sdb1-8] > root 343 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? S Feb15 0:00 [jbd2/sdc1-8] > root 347 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? S Feb15 0:00 [jbd2/sdd1-8] > root 20398 0.0 0.0 112688 2228 pts/2 R<+ 16:56 0:00 /usr/bin/grep --color jbd > > [root@mail-gw:~]$ df > Dateisystem Typ Größe Benutzt Verf. Verw% Eingehängt auf > /dev/sdb1 ext4 5,8G 1,6G 4,2G 28% / > /dev/sdc1 ext4 4,0G 493M 3,5G 13% /var/log > /dev/sdd1 ext4 2,0G 4,4M 2,0G 1% /var/spool > /dev/sda1 ext4 493M 36M 458M 8% /boot > > >> Also, in the spirit of useful bug reporting, what kernel >> are you running? > > always the lastest fedora kernel > 3.18.7-100.fc20.x86_64 > >> Can you run strace of e2fsck, and see if an open(O_EXCL) fails, >> or find some other hint about how e2fsck decided it was in >> use? Possibly paste the last couple hundred lines of strace >> somewhere. > > i will try that on a non-production machine > >> This may be better suited for a bug report, or a thread on >> linux-ext4, than the fedora-kernel list. > > yes, my intention was to first ask if the problem is known and maybe even a solution inthe pipeline and if not finally catch the needed infos like the strace in the initial bugreport > > after it's created i will respond to this post with the link > >> FWIW, the errors below do look indicative of a filesystem >> that has never had the superblock written out during an >> actual unmount... > > likely because the -n param > > the corruption itself may come from https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1192834 which is also really strange Let's continue the discussion in that bug, if this behavior is a result of the testcase in that bug. -Eric _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel
