-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> "Jrgen P. Tjern":
>>> [2297447.631266] aufs 20070702
>>> [2297509.899071] aufs au_new_inode:347:smbd[27416]: Un-notified UDBA or
>>> directly renamed dir, b0, xfs, Simon - Garfunkel - The Best Of Simon -
>>> Garfunkel - Song
> "Jrgen P. Tjern":
> > [2297447.631266] aufs 20070702
> > [2297509.899071] aufs au_new_inode:347:smbd[27416]: Un-notified UDBA or
> > directly renamed dir, b0, xfs, Simon - Garfunkel - The Best Of Simon -
> > Garfunkel - Song For The Asking.mp3, hi1610612893, i16.
Please show me your /sys/fs/auf
"Jrgen P. Tjern":
> [2297447.631266] aufs 20070702
> [2297509.899071] aufs au_new_inode:347:smbd[27416]: Un-notified UDBA or
> directly renamed dir, b0, xfs, Simon - Garfunkel - The Best Of Simon -
> Garfunkel - Song For The Asking.mp3, hi1610612893, i16.
>
> It's not an access directly to the und
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hello Jorgen,
>
> "Jrgen_P._Tjern":
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> Thank you very much for your tests.
>>> Currently I am considering about the bug in aufs inotify handler.
>>> Do you know whether this file 'Simon and Garfu
Hello Jorgen,
"Jrgen_P._Tjern":
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Thank you very much for your tests.
> > Currently I am considering about the bug in aufs inotify handler.
> > Do you know whether this file 'Simon and Garfunkel ... .mp3' has ever
> > been renamed or not?
> (bah, sorry for misposting
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Thank you very much for your tests.
> Currently I am considering about the bug in aufs inotify handler.
> Do you know whether this file 'Simon and Garfunkel ... .mp3' has ever
> been renamed or not?
(bah, sorry for misposting
Hello Alexey,
Alexey Bazhin:
> I'm having same trouble, but i'm using udba=reval and have no
> modifications to branches or aufs at all... and i'm also using xfs...
Thank you for your report.
Then a bug probably lives outside inotify.
If you know how to reproduce this problem, let me know.
Ju
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 15:08:35 +0900
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> "Jrgen_P._Tjern":
> > Here is the dmesg, it has only occured once after I applied the
> > patch. I also updated to the newest aufs. :-) The machine isn't
> > being used as regularly during summer, so use-pattern is a bit
> > differen
"Jrgen_P._Tjern":
> Here is the dmesg, it has only occured once after I applied the patch. I
> also updated to the newest aufs. :-) The machine isn't being used as
> regularly during summer, so use-pattern is a bit different now. :-)
>
> I hope this helps!
Thank you very much for your tests.
Cur
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Here is a debug patch to print more information when the message 'broken
> ino' was produced. Please reproduce the message and send me the debug
> log.
Here is the dmesg, it has only occured once after I applied the patch. I
"Jrgen_P._Tjern":
> I picked the most recent entry in my dmesg, and added that hi and fname
> to the commands. (added 536871063 to the egrep)
> Entry was:
> [1081101.429555] aufs au_new_inode:325:find[31722]: broken ino, b0,
> linux-meta/linux-image-generic_2.6.17.11_i386.deb, hi536871063, i50306.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> "Jrgen_P._Tjern":
>> I removed 3.Lbs as it's not on the fs any more. I ran your script with
>> the changes, produced a lot of output. See the attached file. :-)
>
> Sorry, I should write more correctly.
> The path you set is
"Jrgen_P._Tjern":
> I removed 3.Lbs as it's not on the fs any more. I ran your script with
> the changes, produced a lot of output. See the attached file. :-)
Sorry, I should write more correctly.
The path you set is /storage and it is aufs mount point, isn't it?
It should be branch path. In your
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> "Jrgen_P._Tjern":
>>> Branch 0 would be the first branch on the /proc/mounts-line? If so,
>>> that's /vault/disk3, which is xfs. How do I find largest inode number?
>
> Sorry, please add one line.
>
> [ .. snip .. ]
I rem
> "Jrgen_P._Tjern":
> > Branch 0 would be the first branch on the /proc/mounts-line? If so,
> > that's /vault/disk3, which is xfs. How do I find largest inode number?
Sorry, please add one line.
> #!/bin/sh
>
> path=/tmp
> tmp=/tmp/$$
>
> set -x
> df -i $path
> for i in 1 2
> do
sudo
"Jrgen_P._Tjern":
> Branch 0 would be the first branch on the /proc/mounts-line? If so,
> that's /vault/disk3, which is xfs. How do I find largest inode number?
Please send me the output of this script.
Set $path correctly before you execute it.
Junjiro Okajima
-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> [ .. snip .. ]
> Actually you already specified udba=inotify, so it must be a bug.
> Additionally the inode numbers #805306524, #134217865 and #134217862
> seem to be too large. Are they correct numbers? Generally speaking, t
"Jrgen_P._Tjern":
> getting "aufs au_new_inode:...: broken ino", e.g.:
> [ 349.301408] aufs au_new_inode:325:glftpd[3180]: broken ino, b0,
> files/3.Lbs, hi805306524, i1078. Try udba=3Dinotify.
> Also:
> [631021.668293] aufs au_new_inode:325:twist
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Using 20070528 release, I'm at random intervals
getting "aufs au_new_inode:...: broken ino", e.g.:
[ 349.301408] aufs au_new_inode:325:glftpd[3180]: broken ino, b0,
files/3.Lbs, hi805306524, i1078. Try udba=inotify.
Also:
[6310
19 matches
Mail list logo
