On Fri, 2005-04-08 at 12:39 -0400, Noah Meyerhans wrote: > Hello. I've got a server that is running Linux 2.6.11 with JFS > filesystems. Due to the problems described in > http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0503.1/2524.html, for > which there currently don't seem to be any fixes, I'd like to revert > this server to Linux 2.4. > > I've built a staging server to test the process, and found that fsck.jfs > chokes on the filesystem. It's the same version of fsck (1.1.7, > 22-Jul-2004); only the kernel has changed. The filesystem was created > in Linux 2.6 on an lvm2 volume. The target kernel is 2.4.28 + > device-mapper patches. > > Here's the output of fsck.jfs on the filesystem when running 2.6: > kona:~# fsck.jfs -v /dev/export/sls > fsck.jfs version 1.1.7, 22-Jul-2004 > processing started: 4/8/2005 12.10.37 > Using default parameter: -p > The current device is: /dev/export/sls > Open(...READ/WRITE EXCLUSIVE...) returned rc = 0 > Primary superblock is valid. > The type of file system for the device is JFS. > Block size in bytes: 4096 > Filesystem size in blocks: 292814848 > **Phase 0 - Replay Journal Log > LOGREDO: Log already redone! > logredo returned rc = 0 > Filesystem is clean. > All observed inconsistencies have been repaired. > Filesystem has been marked clean. > **** Filesystem was modified. **** > processing terminated: 4/8/2005 12:10:37 with return code: 0 exit code: 0. > > And here's 2.4: > (none):~# fsck.jfs -v /dev/export/sls > fsck.jfs version 1.1.7, 22-Jul-2004 > processing started: 4/8/2005 12.36.17 > Using default parameter: -p > The current device is: /dev/export/sls > Open(...READ/WRITE EXCLUSIVE...) returned rc = 0 > Invalid filesystem size in the superblock (P). > Invalid filesystem size in the superblock (S). > Superblock is corrupt and cannot be repaired > since both primary and secondary copies are corrupt. > > CANNOT CONTINUE. > > Interestingly enough, the filesystem will mount just fine, and doesn't > seem to exhibit any obvious problems. > > Can anybody shed any light on what's going on? Is this attempt to > revert from 2.6 to 2.4 a bad idea WRT jfs?
It shouldn't be a problem. It would appear that lvm is returning a different device size between the 2.4 and 2.6 kernels. jfs_fsck gets the volume size by calling ioctl(device, BLKGETSIZE64, &sz). Are the contents of /proc/partitions (in particular the number of blocks) consistent between the kernels? > Thanks. > noah > -- David Kleikamp IBM Linux Technology Center ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ Jfs-discussion mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jfs-discussion
