Re: Weird xfs_repair error

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 03:23:52PM +0200, Emmanuel Florac wrote:
> Le Fri, 7 Jul 2017 08:36:33 -0700
> "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx> écrivait:
> 
> > > fatal error -- name create failed in lost+found (28), filesystem
> > > may be out of space  
> > 
> > Would be helpful to have a metadump of this goobered-up lost+found
> > fs...
> > 
> 
> The metadump is here for anyone who would like to have a look:
> 
> http://update2.intellique.com/pub/bign.metadump.xz
> 
> The filesystem is about 115 TiB.
> 

Thanks for posting this. The first thing to note is that this filesystem
is severely corrupted. Nonetheless, I've been playing around with trying
to get the latest for-next xfs_repair to run through this fs (via gdb)
and have definitely hit a few issues:

- xfs_sb_verify() was changed to use bp->b_maps[0].bm_bn rather than
  bp->b_bn in libxfs commit 85428dd23f ("xfs: fix superblock inprogress
  check"). b_maps isn't allocated if the buffer was initialized with
  libxfs_initbuf() (rather than libxfs_initbuf_map()). This causes a
  sigsegv here, though only if I disable -O2 optimization for some
  reason that I haven't dug into yet.
- libxfs commit 0268fdc3fe ("xfs: remove xfs_trans_get_block_res")
  replaced the use of xfs_trans_get_block_res() in
  xfs_bmbt_alloc_block() which causes the -ENOSPC error. The previous
  function was hardcoded to return 1 such that this would never occur.
- The recently added directory sf format verifier (xfs_iformat_fork() ->
  xfs_dir2_sf_verify()) seems to cause a premature repair failure in at
  least one case.

I was able to eventually get repair to complete with some quick hacks to
bypass those issues. I did have to run repair two or three times to get
the fs to a clean state. The fs mounts and otherwise appears clean to
xfs_repair, but it's not clear to me how usable the resulting fs really
is (repair is for fs consistency after all, not necessarily data
recovery). Note that lost+found appears to be loaded with 18T of data
across almost 2 million inodes. :/

Brian

> -- 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Emmanuel Florac     |   Direction technique
>                     |   Intellique
>                     |	<eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>                     |   +33 1 78 94 84 02
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [XFS Filesystem Development (older mail)]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Trails]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux