On Thu, 2002-05-16 at 10:17, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 09:50:31AM -0400, Jim Eshleman wrote:
> > After two weeks of uneventful uptime with -pre6aa1 the system hung
> > with no symptoms, no messages, no way in. XFS filesystems recovered
> > themselves on reboot with no apparent problems. About twelve hours
> > later got the appended oops, in the early AM. I suspect it may have
> > been triggered by the system backup, which is now stuck in D state.
> > Otherwise the system is running normally except loadavg is high (6-7)
> > even though there is little CPU and IO usage.
> I would suggest a full forced fsck and an upgrade to 2.4.19pre8aa3 that
> includes the xfs 1.1 release (it fixes various xfs issues compared to
> 2.4.19pre6aa1). Personally I mostly care about the glue between xfs and
> mainline kernel, so for specific xfs bugs you were right to CC the xfs
> mailing list.
Well with xfs there is no fsck, but there is xfs_repair which is
the equivalent. You can also run xfs_check which will not fix a
filesystem but runs an extensive set of checks on its consistency.
Andrea the interfaces between xfs and the kernel are about to change,
we will no longer require code in vmscan.c and the code in buffer.c
I was not aware that the xfs code in the aa kernels still
predated 1.1, in that case upgrading is definitely a good idea.