Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 17 Aug 2006 08:47:50 +1000 | From | Nathan Scott <> | Subject | Re: 2.6.18-rc3-git3 - XFS - BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 00000078 |
| |
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 12:38:10PM +0000, Paul Slootman wrote: > Nathan Scott <nathans@sgi.com> wrote: > >On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 12:25:03PM +0200, Jesper Juhl wrote: > >> I didn't capture all of the xfs_repair output, but I did get this : > >> ... > >> Phase 4 - check for duplicate blocks... > >> - setting up duplicate extent list... > >> - clear lost+found (if it exists) ... > >> - clearing existing "lost+found" inode > >> - deleting existing "lost+found" entry > >> - check for inodes claiming duplicate blocks... > >> - agno = 0 > >> - agno = 1 > >> - agno = 2 > >> - agno = 3 > >> - agno = 4 > >> - agno = 5 > >> - agno = 6 > >> LEAFN node level is 1 inode 412035424 bno = 8388608 > > > >Ooh. Can you describe this test case you're using? Something with > >a bunch of renames in it, obviously, but I'd also like to be able to > >reproduce locally with the exact data set (file names in particular), > >if at all possible. > > >From your reaction above I gather that "LEAFN node level is 1 inode ..." > is a bad thing? > > My filesystem (that crashes under heavy load, while rsyncing to and from > it) has a lot of these messages when xfs_repair is run.
Do you have a reproducible test case? Please send a go-to-woe recipe so I can see the problem first hand... and preferably one that is, er, slightly simpler than Jesper's case.
thanks.
-- Nathan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |