On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 02:27 -0600, Poul Petersen wrote: > I'm trying to fsck a 1.2TB file system that has a lot of files. The > fsck utility uses about 2.5GB of RAM and runs for quite a long time but > eventually fails with error message attached below. Any help would be > greatly appreciated! > > -poul > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] jfsutils-1.1.10]# uname -a > Linux vat 2.6.15-1.1833_FC4smp #1 SMP Wed Mar 1 23:56:51 EST 2006 i686 i686 > i386 GNU/Linux > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] jfsutils-1.1.10]# cat /etc/redhat-release > Fedora Core release 4 (Stentz) > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] jfsutils-1.1.10]# fsck.jfs -V > fsck.jfs version 1.1.10, 19-Oct-2005 > processing started: 4/14/2006 1.25.36 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] jfsutils-1.1.10]# fsck.jfs -v /dev/vg01-vat/rsync > fsck.jfs version 1.1.10, 19-Oct-2005 > processing started: 4/13/2006 10.18.42 > Using default parameter: -p > The current device is: /dev/vg01-vat/rsync > 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: 335872000 > **Phase 0 - Replay Journal Log > LOGREDO: Log already redone! > logredo returned rc = 0 > **Phase 1 - Check Blocks, Files/Directories, and Directory Entries > **Phase 2 - Count links > **Phase 3 - Duplicate Block Rescan and Directory Connectedness > **Phase 4 - Report Problems > **Phase 5 - Check Connectivity > No paths were found for inode F22680164. > No paths were found for inode F22680169. > No paths were found for inode F22680172. > No paths were found for inode F22680174. > No paths were found for inode F22680175. > No paths were found for inode F22680178. > No paths were found for inode F22680182. > No paths were found for inode F22680183. > **Phase 6 - Perform Approved Corrections > Superblock marked dirty because repairs are about to be written. > *** buffer overflow detected ***: fsck.jfs terminated > ======= Backtrace: ========= > /lib/libc.so.6(__chk_fail+0x41)[0x7bfc45] > /lib/libc.so.6(__vsprintf_chk+0x0)[0x7bf510] > /lib/libc.so.6(_IO_default_xsputn+0x97)[0x742858] > /lib/libc.so.6(_IO_vfprintf+0x363f)[0x720141] > /lib/libc.so.6(__vsprintf_chk+0xa1)[0x7bf5b1] > /lib/libc.so.6(__sprintf_chk+0x30)[0x7bf504] > fsck.jfs[0x8050207] > fsck.jfs[0x806e6d1] > fsck.jfs[0x806ea44] > /lib/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xdf)[0x6f6d5f] > fsck.jfs[0x8049441]
The installed jfs_fsck binary is stripped, so this stack trace isn't very useful by itself. If you built jfsutils from source, you may be able to get the symbol table info by running objdump against the unstripped version in the source tree: objdump -t jfsutils-1.1.10/fsck/jfs_fsck If not, would it be possible to build jfsutils from the source and re-run jfs_fsck from the source tree? The source can be downloaded from http://jfs.sourceforge.net/project/pub/jfsutils-1.1.10.tar.gz Thank you, Shaggy -- David Kleikamp IBM Linux Technology Center ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Jfs-discussion mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jfs-discussion
