On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 12:52:07AM -0500, Michael L. Semon wrote: > >>> but the 3.10.x kernel you're running will IIRC; use "-m crc=1" on the mkfs.xfs > >>> commandline from a git mkfs.xfs. Did tried and ended with the same problem for filesystem mounting. > >> root@bpserver:/storage/devel/git-xfsprogs# mkfs/mkfs.xfs -f -m crc=1 /dev/sdb3 > >> However, it should be dirent (ftype=1 in the above output) that keeps a > >> vanilla 3.10.17 kernel from mounting the resulting filesystem: > >> > >> [438326.624667] XFS (sdb3): Version 5 superblock detected. This kernel has EXPERIMENTAL support enabled! > >> [438326.624667] Use of these features in this kernel is at your own risk! > >> [438326.624762] XFS (sdb3): Superblock has unknown incompatible features (0x1) enabled. > >> [438326.624762] Filesystem can not be safely mounted by this kernel. > > > > looks this problem is irrelevant to CRC check is enabled or not, and > > Eric has fixed it: > > > > commit 31625f28ad7be67701dc4cefcf52087addd88af4 > > xfs: don't emit corruption noise on fs probes Will try this. > >> I don't know if the CentOS kernel has any extra patches that would enable > >> this filesystem to be mounted. I use vanilla longterm 3.10.x, not CentOS kernel, that is too old for my HW. > >> There might be a way to bisect or revert the git xfsprogs back before dirent > >> and giving that a try. However, it seems best to start working with v5/CRC > >> XFS starting with kernel 3.11. If my luck with recent AIO commits was better, > >> I'd recommend 3.12 instead because that's the real correct answer, problems > >> aside. I have to use longterm kernel and 3.10.x is the latest available. As I have seen the commit for more ACLs there, I expected it should be possible to get it working for this version (https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git/commit/?id=0a8aa1939777dd114479677f0044652c1fd72398) > That stated, I found some time to revert the git xfsprogs, and there was > success in making more than 25 ACLs on vanilla kernel 3.10.17. Again, > this is not recommended--the later kernel and userspace patches are there > for good reason--but the output is pasted after my closing. I will repeat your directions and test it. However, if you as XFS devels do not see these to be stable enough to be used in production environment, I may still revert to some other solution (unix groups) even if these are a night mare to administer for my situation. Thanks for all the info and advices. Regards -- Tomas Kasparek E-mail: kasparek@xxxxxxxxxxxx CVT FIT VUT Brno, L127 Web: http://www.fit.vutbr.cz/~kasparek Bozetechova 1, 612 66 Fax: +420 54114-1270 Brno, Czech Republic Phone: +420 54114-1220 jabber: tomas.kasparek@xxxxxxxxx GPG: 2F1E 1AAF FD3B CFA3 1537 63BD DCBE 18FF A035 53BC May the command line live forever!
Attachment:
pgpJo646aToHT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
