On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 11:34 AM, Manish Katiyar <mkatiyar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Manish Katiyar <mkatiyar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 11:16 AM, Prasad Joshi <prasadjoshi124@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Thanks Manish, >>> >>> The issue was with filesystem creation. It was not getting created >>> properly. I used dumpe2fs command to verify the file system. Actually >>> Superblock was written correctly but, few other fields like free block >>> and free inode list etc were incorrect >>> >>> It seems to be working properly now >>> # dumpe2fs /dev/ftl >>> ... >>> ... >>> Group 0: (Blocks 0-65527) >>> Primary superblock at 0, Group descriptors at 1-1 >>> Reserved GDT blocks at 2-8 >>> Block bitmap at 9 (+9), Inode bitmap at 10 (+10) >>> Inode table at 11-1034 (+11) >>> 64489 free blocks, 32757 free inodes, 2 directories >>> Free blocks: 1039-65527 >>> Free inodes: 12-32768 >>> Group 1: (Blocks 65528-131055) >>> Backup superblock at 65528, Group descriptors at 65529-65529 >>> Reserved GDT blocks at 65530-65536 >>> Block bitmap at 65537 (+9), Inode bitmap at 65538 (+10) >>> Inode table at 65539-66562 (+11) >>> 64493 free blocks, 32768 free inodes, 0 directories >>> Free blocks: 66563-131055 >>> Free inodes: 32769-65536 >>> >>> # mount >>> ... >>> ... >>> /dev/ftl on /mntpt type ext2 (rw,relatime,errors=continue) >>> >>> >>> The other problem which I am facing is with the blocksize. >>> >>> mkfs allows ext2 file system be created with blocksize=8192, >>> overriding the default 4096. But, when I try to mount the file system >>> it fails >>> >>> # mkfs -t ext2 -b 8192 /dev/ftl >>> Warning: blocksize 8192 not usable on most systems. >>> mke2fs 1.41.4 (27-Jan-2009) >>> mkfs.ext2: 8192-byte blocks too big for system (max 4096) >>> Proceed anyway? (y,n) y >>> Warning: 8192-byte blocks too big for system (max 4096), forced to continue >>> warning: 16 blocks unused. >>> >>> Filesystem label= >>> OS type: Linux >>> Block size=8192 (log=3) >>> Fragment size=8192 (log=3) >>> 65536 inodes, 131056 blocks >>> .... >>> .... >>> >>> # mount -t ext2 /dev/ftl /mntpt >>> [54658.092031] EXT2-fs: blocksize too small for device. >>> mount: mounting /dev/ftl on /mntpt failed: Invalid argument >>> >>> I tried specifying blocksize with the mount command, but it also fails > > Have a look at these patches > > http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0708.3/1847.html > > >>> >>> # mount -t ext2 /dev/ftl /mntpt -o blocksize=8192 >>> mount: mounting /dev/ftl on /mntpt failed: Invalid argument >>> >>> The above command fails in parsing the options passed to the command >>> >>> The section "Mount options for ext2" of mount manpage does not mention >>> blocksize option. >> >> Yes, there is no "blocksize" option in ext2. For a list of valid >> options see "tokens" table in ext2/super.c >> >> >>> >>> Is there anyway I can create ext2 filesystem with blocksize 8192? >> >> No ... as far as I know. >> >> Man page of mke2fs says : >> >> -b block-size >> Specify the size of blocks in bytes. Valid block-size >> values are 1024, 2048 and 4096 bytes per block. >> >> And the kernel code says : >> >> int sb_set_blocksize(struct super_block *sb, int size) >> { >> if (set_blocksize(sb->s_bdev, size)) >> return 0; >> /* If we get here, we know size is power of two >> * and it's value is between 512 and PAGE_SIZE */ >> sb->s_blocksize = size; >> sb->s_blocksize_bits = blksize_bits(size); >> return sb->s_blocksize; >> } >> >> and the PAGE_SIZE is 4096. Ya, I see thanks. >> >> Reiserfs supports blocksizes of 8192 , but its man page says :- >> >> -b | --block-size N >> N is block size in bytes. It may only be set to a power >> of 2 within the 512-8192 interval. Note >> that current versions of the kernel ( 2.6.19 ) do NOT >> support any size other than 4096. >> >> >> But is there any specific reason you want to use block sizes of 8192 ? It is hardware's recommendation. The flash hardware uses 8192 blocksize for IOs. Using smaller block size will result in more IOs on flash device. Thanks and Regards, Prasad >> >>> >>> Thanks and Regards, >>> Prasad >>> >>> On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 6:41 PM, Manish Katiyar <mkatiyar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 12:38 PM, Prasad Joshi <prasadjoshi124@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I am working on translation layer for flash. For the purpose testing I am >>>>> using a disk file to simulate the flash behavior. So every read and write on >>>>> the block device finally goes to a disk file, something similar to loop >>>>> device, but in addition maintaining the flash property. >>>>> >>>>> I am able to create the file system on the device (/dev/ftl) but when I try >>>>> to mount the device it fails with error "Invalid Argument". >>>> >>>> From the code I can see -EINVAL can be returned at lot of places. You >>>> need to see dmesg to see the message which can help tracing. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> I thought it is failing to read the super block of the file systems, but it >>>>> seems like it did not fail in superblock read >>>>> >>>>> # strace -o out mount -t ext2 /dev/ftl /mntpt/ >>>>> [ 175.192033] Opening the device. >>>>> [ 175.193599] IftlIoRead: offset=0x400 Length=0x400 >>>>> [ 175.193875] OffsetWithinPage: 400 >>>>> [ 175.195104] Read pos=1002535424, length=8192 >>>>> [ 175.195474] 0000 0001 0000 0004 3333 0000 eea5 0003 fff5 0000 0000 0000 >>>>> 0002 0000 0002 0000 8000 0000 8000 0000 2000 0000 0000 0000 8a9e 4acd 0000 >>>>> 0020 ef53 0001 0001 0000 8a9e 4acd 4e00 00ed 0000 0000 0001 0000 0000 0000 >>>>> 000b 0000 0100 0000 0038 0000 0002 0000 0003 0000 a037 8e0c d6b3 de11 abb8 >>>>> 0635 bff9 2b36 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 >>>>> 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 >>>>> 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 >>>>> 0000 003f 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 >>>>> 0000 a037 8f0c d6b3 de11 abb8 0635 bff9 2b36 0001 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 >>>>> 8a9e 4acd 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 >>>>> 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 >>>>> 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 001c 001c 0001 >>>>> 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 [ 175.215929] Closing the >>>>> device. >>>>> mount: mounting /dev/ftl on /mntpt/ failed: Invalid argument >>>>> >>>>> I tried printing the data in hex format just to make sure proper ext2 magic >>>>> code in present in the superblock read from the flash device. "ef53" is the >>>>> magic code of ext2 superblock, ftl device is correctly reading the magic >>>>> code >>>>> >>>>> # cat out >>>>> execve("/bin/mount", ["mount", "-t", "ext2", "/dev/ftl", "/mntpt/"], [/* 4 >>>>> vars */]) = 0 >>>>> uname({sys="Linux", node="(none)", ...}) = 0 >>>>> brk(0) = 0x72f000 >>>>> brk(0x72ff40) = 0x72ff40 >>>>> arch_prctl(ARCH_SET_FS, 0x72f880) = 0 >>>>> open("/dev/urandom", O_RDONLY) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or >>>>> directory) >>>>> brk(0x750f40) = 0x750f40 >>>>> brk(0x751000) = 0x751000 >>>>> getuid() = 0 >>>>> getuid() = 0 >>>>> geteuid() = 0 >>>>> stat("/dev/ftl", {st_mode=S_IFBLK|0644, st_rdev=makedev(254, 0), ...}) = 0 >>>>> mount("/dev/ftl", "/mntpt/", "ext2", MS_SILENT, "") = -1 EINVAL (Invalid >>>>> argument) >>>>> vfork() = 869 >>>>> --- SIGCHLD (Child exited) @ 0 (0) --- >>>>> write(2, "mount: mounting /dev/ftl on /mntp"..., 61) = 61 >>>>> exit_group(-1) = ? >>>>> >>>>> What could be the reason of failure of mount? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks and Regards, >>>>> Prasad >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Thanks - >>>> Manish >>>> ================================== >>>> [$\*.^ -- I miss being one of them >>>> ================================== >>>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Thanks - >> Manish >> ================================== >> [$\*.^ -- I miss being one of them >> ================================== >> > > > > -- > Thanks - > Manish > ================================== > [$\*.^ -- I miss being one of them > ================================== > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs
