On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 18:27:05 +1000, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote :
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 09:24:22PM +0200, Anisse Astier wrote:
> > directory flags set on non-directory inode 2283178100, would fix bad flags.
> > bad key in bmbt root (is 73434, would reset to 74194) in inode
> > 2283178100 data fork
> > bad fwd (right) sibling pointer (saw 145202888 should be NULLDFSBNO)
> > Segmentation fault
>
> Hmmm. The very next line doesn't appear before the segfault, making
> me think that it's the printf that is causing it to crash.
>
> if (check_dups == 0 &&
> cursor.level[0].right_fsbno != NULLDFSBNO) {
> do_warn(
> _("bad fwd (right) sibling pointer (saw %llu should be NULLDFSBNO)\n"),
> cursor.level[0].right_fsbno);
>
> We get this line of output.
>
> do_warn(
> _("\tin inode %u (%s fork) bmap btree block %llu\n"),
> XFS_AGINO_TO_INO(mp, agno, ino), forkname,
> cursor.level[0].fsbno);
>
> But not this one. I wonder if passing a 64bit number to a %u format
> string (shoul dbe %llu) causes problems on ARM? All the variables
> are valid as they are printed or accessed elsewhere in the function,
> so that's the only thing I can think of without a stack trace to
> tell me otherwise....
I have no idea. I did not succeed in getting a stacktrace. CPU is an
ARM9, and I used Debian armel squeeze & wheezy xfsprogs binaries.
Regards,
Anisse
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
