On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 08:46:44AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> :-). Aha, and I misremembered, it was block descriptor checksums, not
> inode checksums:
>
> One or more block group descriptor checksums are invalid. Fix? yes
>
> Group descriptor 0 checksum is invalid. FIXED.
> Group descriptor
On Sun 2014-06-29 17:04:28, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 10:25:16PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> >
> > One more thing that I noticed: fsck notices bad checksum on inode, and
> > then offers to fix the checksum with 'y' being the default. If there's
> > trash in the inode, that
On Sun 2014-06-29 17:04:28, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 10:25:16PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
One more thing that I noticed: fsck notices bad checksum on inode, and
then offers to fix the checksum with 'y' being the default. If there's
trash in the inode, that will just
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 08:46:44AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
:-). Aha, and I misremembered, it was block descriptor checksums, not
inode checksums:
One or more block group descriptor checksums are invalid. Fix? yes
Group descriptor 0 checksum is invalid. FIXED.
Group descriptor 1
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 10:25:16PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
>
> One more thing that I noticed: fsck notices bad checksum on inode, and
> then offers to fix the checksum with 'y' being the default. If there's
> trash in the inode, that will just induce more errors. (Including
> potentially
Hi!
> > It looks like the filesystem contains _way_ too many 0x's:
>
> That sounds like it's a hardware issue. It may be that the controller
> did something insane while trying to do a write at the point when the
> disk drive was disconnected (and so the drive suffered a power
> drop).
Hi!
It looks like the filesystem contains _way_ too many 0x's:
That sounds like it's a hardware issue. It may be that the controller
did something insane while trying to do a write at the point when the
disk drive was disconnected (and so the drive suffered a power
drop).
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 10:25:16PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
One more thing that I noticed: fsck notices bad checksum on inode, and
then offers to fix the checksum with 'y' being the default. If there's
trash in the inode, that will just induce more errors. (Including
potentially
On Thu, 2014-06-26 at 22:20 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Ok, this ext4 filesystem does _not_ have easy life: it is in usb
> envelope, I wanted
> to use it as a root filesystem, and it is connected to OLPC-1.75,
> running some kind
> of linux-3.0 kernels.
>
> So power disconnects are
On Thu, 2014-06-26 at 22:20 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
Ok, this ext4 filesystem does _not_ have easy life: it is in usb
envelope, I wanted
to use it as a root filesystem, and it is connected to OLPC-1.75,
running some kind
of linux-3.0 kernels.
So power disconnects are common, and
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 10:50:49PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
>
> And for every bug in kernel, there's one in fsck: I did not expect it, but
> fsck actually
> suceeded, and marked fs as clean. But second fsck had issues with
> /lost+found...
I'd need the previous fsck transcript to have any
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 10:30:52PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
>
> It looks like the filesystem contains _way_ too many 0x's:
That sounds like it's a hardware issue. It may be that the controller
did something insane while trying to do a write at the point when the
disk drive was
On Thu 2014-06-26 22:30:52, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > Ok, this ext4 filesystem does _not_ have easy life: it is in usb envelope,
> > I wanted
> > to use it as a root filesystem, and it is connected to OLPC-1.75, running
> > some kind
> > of linux-3.0 kernels.
> >
> > So power disconnects
Hi!
> Ok, this ext4 filesystem does _not_ have easy life: it is in usb envelope, I
> wanted
> to use it as a root filesystem, and it is connected to OLPC-1.75, running
> some kind
> of linux-3.0 kernels.
>
> So power disconnects are common, and even during regular reboot, I hear disk
> doing
Hi!
Ok, this ext4 filesystem does _not_ have easy life: it is in usb envelope, I
wanted
to use it as a root filesystem, and it is connected to OLPC-1.75, running some
kind
of linux-3.0 kernels.
So power disconnects are common, and even during regular reboot, I hear disk
doing
emergency
Hi!
Ok, this ext4 filesystem does _not_ have easy life: it is in usb envelope, I
wanted
to use it as a root filesystem, and it is connected to OLPC-1.75, running some
kind
of linux-3.0 kernels.
So power disconnects are common, and even during regular reboot, I hear disk
doing
emergency
Hi!
Ok, this ext4 filesystem does _not_ have easy life: it is in usb envelope, I
wanted
to use it as a root filesystem, and it is connected to OLPC-1.75, running
some kind
of linux-3.0 kernels.
So power disconnects are common, and even during regular reboot, I hear disk
doing
On Thu 2014-06-26 22:30:52, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
Ok, this ext4 filesystem does _not_ have easy life: it is in usb envelope,
I wanted
to use it as a root filesystem, and it is connected to OLPC-1.75, running
some kind
of linux-3.0 kernels.
So power disconnects are common, and
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 10:30:52PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
It looks like the filesystem contains _way_ too many 0x's:
That sounds like it's a hardware issue. It may be that the controller
did something insane while trying to do a write at the point when the
disk drive was disconnected
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 10:50:49PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
And for every bug in kernel, there's one in fsck: I did not expect it, but
fsck actually
suceeded, and marked fs as clean. But second fsck had issues with
/lost+found...
I'd need the previous fsck transcript to have any idea
20 matches
Mail list logo
