From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 27 10:02:37 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1FFB16A412 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 10:02:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from r.c.ladan@gmail.com) Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.171]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87FC043D53 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 10:01:37 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from r.c.ladan@gmail.com) Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id o2so994095uge for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 02:02:35 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:x-enigmail-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=LGZtBatTQR91hp4kmOHluTQBf1/PB5dleeKUSxt3/yIjU99llncUIkRJP0bwnUqt34otilEuyUhhJvdynfqMAcCvHbLugQoRsstMgxImRauttkUeiHK2IfM+bgVjHzfhbPxZGBIWVsjdrIh8kj1vMzfizKIyUn92I4BKbhEgcxw= Received: by 10.67.27.3 with SMTP id e3mr12175425ugj.1164621755024; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 02:02:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?192.168.123.106? ( [195.241.221.201]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id e34sm18612444ugd.2006.11.27.02.02.33; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 02:02:33 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <456AB7B8.6010504@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 11:02:32 +0100 From: Rene Ladan User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (X11/20061117) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: fs@freebsd.org X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Subject: file creation timestamps wrong on msdos fs? X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 10:02:37 -0000 Hi, on a 7.0-CURRENT i386 box, cvsup'ed 2006-11-26 : rene@s000655:~>mount /dev/ad0s1a on / (ufs, local) devfs on /dev (devfs, local) /dev/ad0s1e on /tmp (ufs, local, soft-updates) /dev/ad0s1f on /usr (ufs, local, soft-updates) /dev/ad0s1d on /var (ufs, local, soft-updates) /dev/da0s1 on /media/stick (msdosfs, local, nosuid, mounted by rene) rene@s000655:~>date && touch a-new-file ma 27 nov 2006 10:53:01 CET rene@s000655:~>ls -lUT a-new-file -rw-r--r-- 1 rene rene 0 27 nov 10:53:01 2006 a-new-file rene@s000655:~>cd /media/stick rene@s000655:/media/stick>date && touch a-new-dos-file ma 27 nov 2006 10:53:59 CET rene@s000655:/media/stick>ls -lUT a-new-dos-file -rwxr-xr-x 1 rene wheel 0 1 jan 01:11:23 1970 a-new-dos-file ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Any idea why this happens? ls and msdosfs themselves seem to be alright. The access and modification timestamps of msdosfs files are shown correctly. Regards, Rene -- GPG fingerprint = E738 5471 D185 7013 0EE0 4FC8 3C1D 6F83 12E1 84F6 (subkeys.pgp.net) "It won't fit on the line." -- me, 2001 From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 27 13:40:47 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 244EA16A59C for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 13:40:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (lurza.secnetix.de [83.120.8.8]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB1F243D45 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 13:39:45 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (zcdsdy@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id kARDedLi033673; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 14:40:44 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from oliver.fromme@secnetix.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.1/Submit) id kARDed3F033672; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 14:40:39 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from olli) Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 14:40:39 +0100 (CET) Message-Id: <200611271340.kARDed3F033672@lurza.secnetix.de> From: Oliver Fromme To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, r.c.ladan@gmail.com In-Reply-To: <456AB7B8.6010504@gmail.com> X-Newsgroups: list.freebsd-fs User-Agent: tin/1.8.2-20060425 ("Shillay") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/4.11-STABLE (i386)) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.1.2 (lurza.secnetix.de [127.0.0.1]); Mon, 27 Nov 2006 14:40:44 +0100 (CET) Cc: Subject: Re: file creation timestamps wrong on msdos fs? X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 13:40:47 -0000 Rene Ladan wrote: > rene@s000655:~>cd /media/stick > rene@s000655:/media/stick>date && touch a-new-dos-file > ma 27 nov 2006 10:53:59 CET > rene@s000655:/media/stick>ls -lUT a-new-dos-file > -rwxr-xr-x 1 rene wheel 0 1 jan 01:11:23 1970 a-new-dos-file > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > Any idea why this happens? ls and msdosfs themselves seem to be > alright. The access and modification timestamps of msdosfs files are > shown correctly. There seems to be a bug in src/sys/fs/msdosfs/msdosfs_vnops.c because of a subtle confusion between what msdosfs calls "ctime" (creation time) and what UNIX calls "ctime" (inode change time, unsupported by msdosfs). If your -current is older than 2006-10-24, look for these lines: dos2unixtime(dep->de_MDate, dep->de_MTime, 0, &vap->va_mtime); if (pmp->pm_flags & MSDOSFSMNT_LONGNAME) { dos2unixtime(dep->de_ADate, 0, 0, &vap->va_atime); dos2unixtime(dep->de_CDate, dep->de_CTime, dep->de_CHun, &vap->va_ctime); } else { vap->va_atime = vap->va_mtime; vap->va_ctime = vap->va_mtime; } If your -current is newer, the dos2unixtime() function has been replaced by fattime2timespec(), but the rest should be the same. The code assigns the "ctime" from the FAT directory entry node to the "ctime" of the vnode's struct attr, which is wrong. Please replace vap->va_ctime by vap->va_birthtime in the above code (two occurences), then recompile and install your kernel and reboot (if you load msdosfs as a kernel module only, then you only need recompile, install, unload and reload that module, of course). That should fix the output of "ls -lUT" (please report). However, the question remains what the vnode's ctime should be set to. There's no such thing as an inode change time in FAT's directory entries. Maybe it should simply be copied from the mtime. Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing Dienstleistungen mit Schwerpunkt FreeBSD: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd Any opinions expressed in this message may be personal to the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of secnetix in any way. PI: int f[9814],b,c=9814,g,i;long a=1e4,d,e,h; main(){for(;b=c,c-=14;i=printf("%04d",e+d/a),e=d%a) while(g=--b*2)d=h*b+a*(i?f[b]:a/5),h=d/--g,f[b]=d%g;} From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 27 14:12:52 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5918516A4A0 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 14:12:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from r.c.ladan@gmail.com) Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.170]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4D2944056 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 14:08:54 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from r.c.ladan@gmail.com) Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id c2so1090132ugf for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 06:09:38 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=EvrH8PH2IELkN55rfhiIKHCf02hLtU4mJx02ZE9zfvhjORYCYrEsVEmCavfZGvMv36KuHGn1ktBtneVXtR0LnRpKgZIn5obg5QbmXa0zSJGtGRtrhbCiCund7Gg7bEk5Lc2IiR8trpgwDTpF3jthu/2gG3H/I4ARumYC9UnHwFw= Received: by 10.66.242.5 with SMTP id p5mr12471901ugh.1164636578125; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 06:09:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?192.168.123.106? ( [195.241.221.201]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 53sm16415989ugn.2006.11.27.06.09.37; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 06:09:37 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <456AF19F.1080104@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 15:09:35 +0100 From: Rene Ladan User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (X11/20061117) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Oliver Fromme References: <200611271340.kARDed3F033672@lurza.secnetix.de> In-Reply-To: <200611271340.kARDed3F033672@lurza.secnetix.de> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: file creation timestamps wrong on msdos fs? X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 14:12:52 -0000 Oliver Fromme schreef: > Rene Ladan wrote: > > rene@s000655:~>cd /media/stick > > rene@s000655:/media/stick>date && touch a-new-dos-file > > ma 27 nov 2006 10:53:59 CET > > rene@s000655:/media/stick>ls -lUT a-new-dos-file > > -rwxr-xr-x 1 rene wheel 0 1 jan 01:11:23 1970 a-new-dos-file > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > > There seems to be a bug in src/sys/fs/msdosfs/msdosfs_vnops.c > because of a subtle confusion between what msdosfs calls > "ctime" (creation time) and what UNIX calls "ctime" (inode > change time, unsupported by msdosfs). > [...] > That should fix the output of "ls -lUT" (please report). Yep, with the file above: rene@s000655:/media/stick>ls -lUT a-new-dos-file -rwxr-xr-x 1 rene wheel 0 27 nov 10:53:59 2006 a-new-dos-file Time for yet another PR :) > However, the question remains what the vnode's ctime should > be set to. There's no such thing as an inode change time > in FAT's directory entries. Maybe it should simply be > copied from the mtime. Maybe, but how can you see the inode change time anyway? 'man ls' and 'apropos inode' don't tell me. > > Best regards > Oliver > Regards, Rene -- GPG fingerprint = E738 5471 D185 7013 0EE0 4FC8 3C1D 6F83 12E1 84F6 (subkeys.pgp.net) "It won't fit on the line." -- me, 2001 From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 27 14:55:14 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96F1416A500 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 14:55:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (lurza.secnetix.de [83.120.8.8]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7E4343D88 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 14:54:02 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (ytmlif@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id kAREsuj9038671; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 15:55:02 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from oliver.fromme@secnetix.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.1/Submit) id kAREsurO038670; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 15:54:56 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from olli) Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 15:54:56 +0100 (CET) Message-Id: <200611271454.kAREsurO038670@lurza.secnetix.de> From: Oliver Fromme To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, r.c.ladan@gmail.com In-Reply-To: <456AF19F.1080104@gmail.com> X-Newsgroups: list.freebsd-fs User-Agent: tin/1.8.2-20060425 ("Shillay") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/4.11-STABLE (i386)) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.1.2 (lurza.secnetix.de [127.0.0.1]); Mon, 27 Nov 2006 15:55:02 +0100 (CET) Cc: Subject: Re: file creation timestamps wrong on msdos fs? X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 14:55:14 -0000 Rene Ladan wrote: > Oliver Fromme schreef: > > [...] > > That should fix the output of "ls -lUT" (please report). > Yep, with the file above: > > rene@s000655:/media/stick>ls -lUT a-new-dos-file > -rwxr-xr-x 1 rene wheel 0 27 nov 10:53:59 2006 a-new-dos-file > > Time for yet another PR :) Yes ... Are you going to submit a PR, or shall I do it? > > However, the question remains what the vnode's ctime should > > be set to. There's no such thing as an inode change time > > in FAT's directory entries. Maybe it should simply be > > copied from the mtime. > Maybe, but how can you see the inode change time anyway? > > 'man ls' and 'apropos inode' don't tell me. ls -lc Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing Dienstleistungen mit Schwerpunkt FreeBSD: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd Any opinions expressed in this message may be personal to the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of secnetix in any way. "Python is an experiment in how much freedom programmers need. Too much freedom and nobody can read another's code; too little and expressiveness is endangered." -- Guido van Rossum From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 27 15:08:11 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D160F16A40F for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 15:08:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from r.c.ladan@gmail.com) Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.175]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8C7A43D7F for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 15:06:52 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from r.c.ladan@gmail.com) Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id o2so1065920uge for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 07:07:52 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=btYjmXXAV+zPop8YMrLmedA7gKPd1sl2+53G3sUXw3FxqFa5RNLbpPZVBwx52JlCvjl7UvCnXRekD5YwCbCVy1OgogzBU3Mt5KOapM0HySjzQM5NLiFw3B4V7ne/yGXIE6JViKzOx8FVZh5wz5l/ZPUBE+ewnCPKu6lISqT3kIg= Received: by 10.67.89.5 with SMTP id r5mr12541048ugl.1164640072282; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 07:07:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?192.168.123.106? ( [195.241.221.201]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id l40sm17930386ugc.2006.11.27.07.07.51; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 07:07:51 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <456AFF46.7070603@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 16:07:50 +0100 From: Rene Ladan User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (X11/20061117) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Oliver Fromme , fs@freebsd.org References: <200611271454.kAREsurO038670@lurza.secnetix.de> In-Reply-To: <200611271454.kAREsurO038670@lurza.secnetix.de> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Subject: Re: file creation timestamps wrong on msdos fs? X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 15:08:11 -0000 Oliver Fromme schreef: > Rene Ladan wrote: > > Oliver Fromme schreef: > > > [...] > > > That should fix the output of "ls -lUT" (please report). > > Yep, with the file above: > > > > rene@s000655:/media/stick>ls -lUT a-new-dos-file > > -rwxr-xr-x 1 rene wheel 0 27 nov 10:53:59 2006 a-new-dos-file > > > > Time for yet another PR :) > > Yes ... Are you going to submit a PR, or shall I do it? > I've sent a kern PR with s/ctime/birthtime (the confirmation has not yet arrived). > > > However, the question remains what the vnode's ctime should > > > be set to. There's no such thing as an inode change time > > > in FAT's directory entries. Maybe it should simply be > > > copied from the mtime. > > Maybe, but how can you see the inode change time anyway? > > > > 'man ls' and 'apropos inode' don't tell me. > > ls -lc > Ah... It doesn't output anything useful on msdos filesystems after the patch. > Best regards > Oliver > Regards, Rene -- GPG fingerprint = E738 5471 D185 7013 0EE0 4FC8 3C1D 6F83 12E1 84F6 (subkeys.pgp.net) "It won't fit on the line." -- me, 2001 From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 27 15:31:40 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83ADD16A4D2 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 15:31:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (lurza.secnetix.de [83.120.8.8]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2772643E79 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 15:22:52 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (hcxina@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id kARFNh5m039945; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 16:23:48 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from oliver.fromme@secnetix.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.1/Submit) id kARFNh4O039944; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 16:23:43 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from olli) Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 16:23:43 +0100 (CET) Message-Id: <200611271523.kARFNh4O039944@lurza.secnetix.de> From: Oliver Fromme To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, r.c.ladan@gmail.com In-Reply-To: <456AFF46.7070603@gmail.com> X-Newsgroups: list.freebsd-fs User-Agent: tin/1.8.2-20060425 ("Shillay") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/4.11-STABLE (i386)) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.1.2 (lurza.secnetix.de [127.0.0.1]); Mon, 27 Nov 2006 16:23:48 +0100 (CET) Cc: Subject: Re: file creation timestamps wrong on msdos fs? X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 15:31:40 -0000 Rene Ladan wrote: > Oliver Fromme schreef: > > Yes ... Are you going to submit a PR, or shall I do it? > > > I've sent a kern PR with s/ctime/birthtime (the confirmation has not yet > arrived). Well, as I said, that patch is not complete ... > > ls -lc > > > Ah... > > It doesn't output anything useful on msdos filesystems after the patch. It didn't output anything useful before the patch either. ;-) Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing Dienstleistungen mit Schwerpunkt FreeBSD: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd Any opinions expressed in this message may be personal to the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of secnetix in any way. I suggested holding a "Python Object Oriented Programming Seminar", but the acronym was unpopular. -- Joseph Strout From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 27 16:52:22 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4912416A4AB for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 16:52:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brontecollar@patio.com) Received: from fairfull.com (d01m-213-44-214-53.d4.club-internet.fr [213.44.214.53]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C249943E53 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 16:48:44 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from brontecollar@patio.com) Message-ID: <000001c71243$bfa4dcf0$c951a8c0@qbkhct> From: "Cecelia Dean" To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 08:47:39 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Subject: Re: nystagmu X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Cecelia Dean List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 16:52:22 -0000 Hi, =20 VjAGRA_yl_$1,78 CjALiS_qt_$3,00 LEVjTRA_sp_$3,33 =20 www [dot] rx44 [dot] info _____ =20 now. From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 27 20:38:45 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B938116A4FB for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 20:38:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from mh1.centtech.com (moat3.centtech.com [64.129.166.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CFEF451D9 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 20:21:23 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from [10.177.171.220] (neutrino.centtech.com [10.177.171.220]) by mh1.centtech.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id kARKMNCe074664; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 14:22:23 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Message-ID: <456B4901.5000500@centtech.com> Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 14:22:25 -0600 From: Eric Anderson User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (X11/20061015) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg Eden References: <69404A94-8EBC-4978-8EA6-32E3DB1FA6A6@wholemeal.net> In-Reply-To: <69404A94-8EBC-4978-8EA6-32E3DB1FA6A6@wholemeal.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.88.4/2252/Mon Nov 27 12:47:11 2006 on mh1.centtech.com X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=8.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.1.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.6 (2006-10-03) on mh1.centtech.com Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: fsck crash: bad inode number to nextinode X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 20:38:45 -0000 On 11/24/06 03:31, Greg Eden wrote: > Hello, > > I'm try to recover a RAID5 volume which was badly corrupted when a > drive was removed during a rebuild. It contained about 1 TB of data > and was formatted with default values under FreeBSD 6.0-R. > > I have used dd to image the drive onto another volume and am mounting > it with mdconfig so I can work on that an not cause futher damage. > However when I run fsck_ufs on the /dev/md0 partition it eventually > crashes out during Phase 1 with > > UNKNOWN FILE TYPE I=42151497 > UNEXPECTED SOFT UPDATE INCONSISTENCY > > CLEAR? yes > > fsck_ufs: bad inode number 42158080 to nextinode > > Is it possible to work around this to get fsck to complete? > > It is possible to mount the partition and some of the data is there, > however most of it is not. > > Thanks in advance for any help. I have previously posted to freebsd- > questions without a response. I've seen this before with really badly UFS filesystems, where the cylinder groups were mangled. I couldn't think of a good way to have fsck fix this, since you can't really guess at the inode information, and so the only option is really to just 'delete' the inode information, but that wasn't clear to me how to do that safely. You would probably be best served by running one of the various tools (in source and also in ports) that try to recover files themselves from a dd'ed image. Eric -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Eric Anderson Sr. Systems Administrator Centaur Technology An undefined problem has an infinite number of solutions. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 27 21:04:01 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D47A716A40F for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 21:04:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from mh1.centtech.com (moat3.centtech.com [64.129.166.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF1B644051 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 20:53:35 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from [10.177.171.220] (neutrino.centtech.com [10.177.171.220]) by mh1.centtech.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id kARKrlHL080725; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 14:53:47 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Message-ID: <456B505D.8060900@centtech.com> Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 14:53:49 -0600 From: Eric Anderson User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (X11/20061015) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg Eden References: <69404A94-8EBC-4978-8EA6-32E3DB1FA6A6@wholemeal.net> <456B4901.5000500@centtech.com> <614F741C-5AF0-4E72-B77E-FD85311FAD9A@wholemeal.net> In-Reply-To: <614F741C-5AF0-4E72-B77E-FD85311FAD9A@wholemeal.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.88.4/2252/Mon Nov 27 12:47:11 2006 on mh1.centtech.com X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=8.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.1.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.6 (2006-10-03) on mh1.centtech.com Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: fsck crash: bad inode number to nextinode X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 21:04:01 -0000 On 11/27/06 14:48, Greg Eden wrote: > On 27 Nov 2006, at 20:22, Eric Anderson wrote: > >> On 11/24/06 03:31, Greg Eden wrote: >>> Hello, >>> I'm try to recover a RAID5 volume which was badly corrupted when >>> a drive was removed during a rebuild. It contained about 1 TB of >>> data and was formatted with default values under FreeBSD 6.0-R. >>> I have used dd to image the drive onto another volume and am >>> mounting it with mdconfig so I can work on that an not cause >>> futher damage. However when I run fsck_ufs on the /dev/md0 >>> partition it eventually crashes out during Phase 1 with >>> UNKNOWN FILE TYPE I=42151497 >>> UNEXPECTED SOFT UPDATE INCONSISTENCY >>> CLEAR? yes >>> fsck_ufs: bad inode number 42158080 to nextinode >>> Is it possible to work around this to get fsck to complete? >>> It is possible to mount the partition and some of the data is >>> there, however most of it is not. >>> Thanks in advance for any help. I have previously posted to >>> freebsd- questions without a response. >> >> I've seen this before with really badly UFS filesystems, where the >> cylinder groups were mangled. I couldn't think of a good way to >> have fsck fix this, since you can't really guess at the inode >> information, and so the only option is really to just 'delete' the >> inode information, but that wasn't clear to me how to do that safely. > > OK. I had a feeling fsck wasn't going to save me this time :( > >> You would probably be best served by running one of the various >> tools (in source and also in ports) that try to recover files >> themselves from a dd'ed image. > > Do you have any specific recommendations? a search of freshports.org > revealed 'magicrescue' and 'foremost' as likely looking rescue > utilities. Is there anything else? > > Thanks for the pointers! /usr/src/tools/tools/recoverdisk Is all I can think of right now.. Eric -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Eric Anderson Sr. Systems Administrator Centaur Technology An undefined problem has an infinite number of solutions. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 27 21:15:17 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D3D016A412 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 21:15:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from greg@wholemeal.net) Received: from mail9.messagelabs.com (mail9.messagelabs.com [194.205.110.133]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 118EA43DD4 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 20:54:48 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from greg@wholemeal.net) X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: greg@wholemeal.net X-Msg-Ref: server-5.tower-9.messagelabs.com!1164660497!25246908!1 X-StarScan-Version: 5.5.10.7; banners=-,-,- X-Originating-IP: [212.135.210.82] Received: (qmail 8639 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2006 20:48:17 -0000 Received: from dsl-212-135-210-82.dsl.easynet.co.uk (HELO warprecords.com) (212.135.210.82) by server-5.tower-9.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 27 Nov 2006 20:48:17 -0000 Received: from [192.168.100.40] (HELO [192.168.0.10]) by warprecords.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.10) with ESMTPS id 6994983; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 20:48:16 +0000 In-Reply-To: <456B4901.5000500@centtech.com> References: <69404A94-8EBC-4978-8EA6-32E3DB1FA6A6@wholemeal.net> <456B4901.5000500@centtech.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <614F741C-5AF0-4E72-B77E-FD85311FAD9A@wholemeal.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Greg Eden Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 20:48:14 +0000 To: Eric Anderson X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.2) Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: fsck crash: bad inode number to nextinode X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 21:15:17 -0000 On 27 Nov 2006, at 20:22, Eric Anderson wrote: > On 11/24/06 03:31, Greg Eden wrote: >> Hello, >> I'm try to recover a RAID5 volume which was badly corrupted when >> a drive was removed during a rebuild. It contained about 1 TB of >> data and was formatted with default values under FreeBSD 6.0-R. >> I have used dd to image the drive onto another volume and am >> mounting it with mdconfig so I can work on that an not cause >> futher damage. However when I run fsck_ufs on the /dev/md0 >> partition it eventually crashes out during Phase 1 with >> UNKNOWN FILE TYPE I=42151497 >> UNEXPECTED SOFT UPDATE INCONSISTENCY >> CLEAR? yes >> fsck_ufs: bad inode number 42158080 to nextinode >> Is it possible to work around this to get fsck to complete? >> It is possible to mount the partition and some of the data is >> there, however most of it is not. >> Thanks in advance for any help. I have previously posted to >> freebsd- questions without a response. > > > I've seen this before with really badly UFS filesystems, where the > cylinder groups were mangled. I couldn't think of a good way to > have fsck fix this, since you can't really guess at the inode > information, and so the only option is really to just 'delete' the > inode information, but that wasn't clear to me how to do that safely. OK. I had a feeling fsck wasn't going to save me this time :( > You would probably be best served by running one of the various > tools (in source and also in ports) that try to recover files > themselves from a dd'ed image. Do you have any specific recommendations? a search of freshports.org revealed 'magicrescue' and 'foremost' as likely looking rescue utilities. Is there anything else? Thanks for the pointers! best. greg. From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 28 09:32:12 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EAC416A40F for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2006 09:32:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bde@zeta.org.au) Received: from mailout2.pacific.net.au (mailout2-3.pacific.net.au [61.8.2.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDDA543CAE for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2006 09:31:48 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bde@zeta.org.au) Received: from mailproxy1.pacific.net.au (mailproxy1.pacific.net.au [61.8.2.162]) by mailout2.pacific.net.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD65B109A26; Tue, 28 Nov 2006 20:31:38 +1100 (EST) Received: from katana.zip.com.au (katana.zip.com.au [61.8.7.246]) by mailproxy1.pacific.net.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 735808C03; Tue, 28 Nov 2006 20:31:38 +1100 (EST) Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 20:31:37 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans X-X-Sender: bde@delplex.bde.org To: Oliver Fromme In-Reply-To: <200611271340.kARDed3F033672@lurza.secnetix.de> Message-ID: <20061128200917.W1917@delplex.bde.org> References: <200611271340.kARDed3F033672@lurza.secnetix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: file creation timestamps wrong on msdos fs? X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 09:32:12 -0000 On Mon, 27 Nov 2006, Oliver Fromme wrote: > Rene Ladan wrote: > > rene@s000655:~>cd /media/stick > > rene@s000655:/media/stick>date && touch a-new-dos-file > > ma 27 nov 2006 10:53:59 CET > > rene@s000655:/media/stick>ls -lUT a-new-dos-file > > -rwxr-xr-x 1 rene wheel 0 1 jan 01:11:23 1970 a-new-dos-file > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > > Any idea why this happens? ls and msdosfs themselves seem to be > > alright. The access and modification timestamps of msdosfs files are > > shown correctly. > > There seems to be a bug in src/sys/fs/msdosfs/msdosfs_vnops.c > because of a subtle confusion between what msdosfs calls > "ctime" (creation time) and what UNIX calls "ctime" (inode > change time, unsupported by msdosfs). If your -current is > older than 2006-10-24, look for these lines: > > dos2unixtime(dep->de_MDate, dep->de_MTime, 0, &vap->va_mtime); > if (pmp->pm_flags & MSDOSFSMNT_LONGNAME) { > dos2unixtime(dep->de_ADate, 0, 0, &vap->va_atime); > dos2unixtime(dep->de_CDate, dep->de_CTime, dep->de_CHun, &vap->va_ctime); > } else { > vap->va_atime = vap->va_mtime; > vap->va_ctime = vap->va_mtime; > } That gives a bogus ctime in the MSDOSFSMNT_LONGNAME case. The bogus birthtime is apparently given in both cases by using vap->va_birthtime uninitialized, so it is stack garbage. va_birthtime isn't referenced by any file system except ffs, but a few file systems initialize it to 0 by bzero()ing the whole *vap, and least 1 file system initializes it accidentally correctly using VATTR_NULL(). Grepping in sys/fs shows bzero()ing for the following file systems: devfs, portalfs This gives the well known date of Dec 31 1969 (0 seconds since the Epoch in local time East of Greenwich :-). VATTR_NULL() is used by xfs. It gives VNOVAL which which happens to be (time_t)-1 when converted to a time_t. This is a better value than 0 for an unsupported time_t fie.d xfs has an explicit reference to va_birthtime, but only under #if 0. > That should fix the output of "ls -lUT" (please report). > However, the question remains what the vnode's ctime should > be set to. There's no such thing as an inode change time > in FAT's directory entries. Maybe it should simply be > copied from the mtime. There's nothing better. msdosfs already does this for the !MSDOSFSMNT_LONGNAME case. Utilities expect the ctime to be set to an actual time, so it should't be set to -1 like the btime^H^H^H^Hirthtime. Bruce From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 28 11:17:17 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1406F16A614 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2006 11:17:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (lurza.secnetix.de [83.120.8.8]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C0D84404D for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2006 11:13:56 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (uvqlwx@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id kASBDYra095438; Tue, 28 Nov 2006 12:13:39 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from oliver.fromme@secnetix.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.1/Submit) id kASBDTLW095435; Tue, 28 Nov 2006 12:13:29 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from olli) From: Oliver Fromme Message-Id: <200611281113.kASBDTLW095435@lurza.secnetix.de> To: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans) Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 12:13:29 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <20061128200917.W1917@delplex.bde.org> X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL8] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.1.2 (lurza.secnetix.de [127.0.0.1]); Tue, 28 Nov 2006 12:13:40 +0100 (CET) Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: file creation timestamps wrong on msdos fs? X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 11:17:17 -0000 Bruce Evans wrote: > Oliver Fromme wrote: > > There seems to be a bug in src/sys/fs/msdosfs/msdosfs_vnops.c > > because of a subtle confusion between what msdosfs calls > > "ctime" (creation time) and what UNIX calls "ctime" (inode > > change time, unsupported by msdosfs). If your -current is > > older than 2006-10-24, look for these lines: > > > > dos2unixtime(dep->de_MDate, dep->de_MTime, 0, &vap->va_mtime); > > if (pmp->pm_flags & MSDOSFSMNT_LONGNAME) { > > dos2unixtime(dep->de_ADate, 0, 0, &vap->va_atime); > > dos2unixtime(dep->de_CDate, dep->de_CTime, dep->de_CHun, &vap->va_ctime); > > } else { > > vap->va_atime = vap->va_mtime; > > vap->va_ctime = vap->va_mtime; > > } > > That gives a bogus ctime in the MSDOSFSMNT_LONGNAME case. Yes, that's what I meant. Actually the current code contains two bugs: -1- It initializes the ctime to a wrong value (i.e. to the birthtime of the FAT entry, which is confusingly called "CTime"). -2- It doesn't initialize the birthtime at all. > The bogus > birthtime is apparently given in both cases by using vap->va_birthtime > uninitialized, so it is stack garbage. va_birthtime isn't referenced by > any file system except ffs, but a few file systems initialize it to > 0 by bzero()ing the whole *vap, and least 1 file system initializes > it accidentally correctly using VATTR_NULL(). Well, FAT _does_ support a birthtime ("CTime") in the MSDOSFSMNT_LONGNAME case, so it makes sense to use that value to initialize the vap->birthtime. In the !MSDOSFSMNT_LONGNAME case, the vap->birthtime should be zeroed or set to -1 (either is fine with me, but I agree that -1 for an unsupported birthtime makes sense). > > However, the question remains what the vnode's ctime should > > be set to. There's no such thing as an inode change time > > in FAT's directory entries. Maybe it should simply be > > copied from the mtime. > > There's nothing better. msdosfs already does this for the > !MSDOSFSMNT_LONGNAME case. Utilities expect the ctime to be set to > an actual time, so it should't be set to -1 like the btime^H^H^H^Hirthtime. OK, so I propose to change the above code to this: dos2unixtime(dep->de_MDate, dep->de_MTime, 0, &vap->va_mtime); vap->va_ctime = vap->va_mtime; if (pmp->pm_flags & MSDOSFSMNT_LONGNAME) { dos2unixtime(dep->de_ADate, 0, 0, &vap->va_atime); dos2unixtime(dep->de_CDate, dep->de_CTime, dep->de_CHun, &vap->va_birthtime); } else { vap->va_atime = vap->va_mtime; vap->va_birthtime = (time_t) -1; } That's for RELENG_6. In HEAD, dos2unixtime() is replaced with fattime2timespec(), but the rest should be the same. Rene's PR hasn't showed up in gnats yet ... Should I submit a fresh PR with a proper patch, or is it not needed? Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing Dienstleistungen mit Schwerpunkt FreeBSD: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd Any opinions expressed in this message may be personal to the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of secnetix in any way. "... there are two ways of constructing a software design: One way is to make it so simple that there are _obviously_ no deficiencies and the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no _obvious_ deficiencies." -- C.A.R. Hoare, ACM Turing Award Lecture, 1980 From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 28 15:59:45 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 366C316A514 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2006 15:59:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rees@citi.umich.edu) Received: from citi.umich.edu (citi.umich.edu [141.211.133.111]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4320C43E9D for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2006 15:58:21 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from rees@citi.umich.edu) Received: from citi.umich.edu (dumaguete.citi.umich.edu [141.211.133.51]) by citi.umich.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id D48891BC08 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2006 10:58:02 -0500 (EST) From: Jim Rees To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <200611281113.kASBDTLW095435@lurza.secnetix.de> (Oliver Fromme, Tue, 28 Nov 2006 12:13:29 +0100) Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 10:58:02 -0500 Sender: rees@citi.umich.edu Message-Id: <20061128155802.D48891BC08@citi.umich.edu> Subject: Re: file creation timestamps wrong on msdos fs? X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 15:59:45 -0000 This seems to be a common problem. OpenBSD has the same bug. And our NFSv4 client, which I will fix. From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 28 18:15:43 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AADF116A4FB for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2006 18:15:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bde@zeta.org.au) Received: from mailout2.pacific.net.au (mailout2-3.pacific.net.au [61.8.2.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB84043D90 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2006 18:13:57 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bde@zeta.org.au) Received: from mailproxy2.pacific.net.au (mailproxy2.pacific.net.au [61.8.2.163]) by mailout2.pacific.net.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 243B810A0E2; Wed, 29 Nov 2006 05:13:50 +1100 (EST) Received: from katana.zip.com.au (katana.zip.com.au [61.8.7.246]) by mailproxy2.pacific.net.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3251627409; Wed, 29 Nov 2006 05:13:50 +1100 (EST) Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 05:13:49 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans X-X-Sender: bde@delplex.bde.org To: Oliver Fromme In-Reply-To: <200611281113.kASBDTLW095435@lurza.secnetix.de> Message-ID: <20061129051319.R3484@delplex.bde.org> References: <200611281113.kASBDTLW095435@lurza.secnetix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: file creation timestamps wrong on msdos fs? X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 18:15:43 -0000 On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Oliver Fromme wrote: > Rene's PR hasn't showed up in gnats yet ... Should I submit > a fresh PR with a proper patch, or is it not needed? Better record it somwhere safer than here. Bruce From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 29 15:50:39 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 175BA16A403 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 2006 15:50:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (lurza.secnetix.de [83.120.8.8]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11E2B43FA9 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 2006 15:44:08 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (tytmli@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id kATFi332078603; Wed, 29 Nov 2006 16:44:08 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from oliver.fromme@secnetix.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.1/Submit) id kATFhv5h078598; Wed, 29 Nov 2006 16:43:57 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from olli) From: Oliver Fromme Message-Id: <200611291543.kATFhv5h078598@lurza.secnetix.de> To: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans) Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 16:43:57 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <20061129051319.R3484@delplex.bde.org> X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL8] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.1.2 (lurza.secnetix.de [127.0.0.1]); Wed, 29 Nov 2006 16:44:09 +0100 (CET) Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: file creation timestamps wrong on msdos fs? X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 15:50:39 -0000 Bruce Evans wrote: > On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Oliver Fromme wrote: > > > Rene's PR hasn't showed up in gnats yet ... Should I submit > > a fresh PR with a proper patch, or is it not needed? > > Better record it somwhere safer than here. I submitted it as kern/106018. Thank you very much for your help! Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing Dienstleistungen mit Schwerpunkt FreeBSD: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd Any opinions expressed in this message may be personal to the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of secnetix in any way. Python is executable pseudocode. Perl is executable line noise. From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 29 20:59:57 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCDD816A416 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 2006 20:59:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from aronesimi@yahoo.com) Received: from web58614.mail.re3.yahoo.com (web58614.mail.re3.yahoo.com [68.142.236.212]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A09E243CBA for ; Wed, 29 Nov 2006 20:59:49 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from aronesimi@yahoo.com) Received: (qmail 11144 invoked by uid 60001); 29 Nov 2006 20:59:37 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=r/DDaurM5ChjYu9jZ/i2Ne8yna3jtKwa0t6UQkdLOdq886Wf4iHGpMsYGLVqiUpcdHmoI6Hmxzy/SLhzPDCksNNnXChP35nmqBQLy0i2kEA0SvXOkDI71cDzHbdke0KBNt2sbyYJ3LyqoudbkGGSNAXqTvu7K/YhH5BQ0X63H/c=; X-YMail-OSG: ksG_vZUVM1m_Yuv91hX._ZJxHpTBSpsXC1Qvmk3kmHuzGTZ0OL0fxMNM7U3FJYYgS9sT79nEWf.rW1atCeJ2FKQgDcc0Von8TQZw5PdSzJfPYZXLFlZqJg-- Received: from [75.72.230.91] by web58614.mail.re3.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 29 Nov 2006 12:59:37 PST Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 12:59:37 -0800 (PST) From: Arone Silimantia To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: <340522.11027.qm@web58614.mail.re3.yahoo.com> X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 22:23:16 +0000 Subject: one big array, or a boot array and a (less big) array ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 20:59:57 -0000 I have a system with 8 drive bays. I have 8 250 GB disks. I would like to just create one giant raid5 array in my adaptec hardware raid controller of size 1.75 TB, and just make my partitions (/, /data, /var) on that big 2 TB array. But I feel like I have heard suggestions on this list before that one should have a separate array just for the boot and userland, and that the big monster array should be separate from that. So instead, should I take two of the 8 disks and make them a mirror, and put boot/userland on there, and then make a raid5 out of the remaining 6 ? Or does it not matter at all ? If one is better, why ? Thanks. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Music Unlimited Access over 1 million songs. http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 29 22:38:11 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CB8616A504 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 2006 22:38:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD0F143CA6 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 2006 22:37:41 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from [192.168.254.11] (phobos.samsco.home [192.168.254.11]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id kATMbUKm071830; Wed, 29 Nov 2006 15:37:36 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Message-ID: <456E0BA2.90104@samsco.org> Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 15:37:22 -0700 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.0.7) Gecko/20060910 SeaMonkey/1.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Arone Silimantia References: <340522.11027.qm@web58614.mail.re3.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <340522.11027.qm@web58614.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.1.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.1 (2006-03-10) on pooker.samsco.org Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: one big array, or a boot array and a (less big) array ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 22:38:11 -0000 Arone Silimantia wrote: > I have a system with 8 drive bays. I have 8 250 GB > disks. > > I would like to just create one giant raid5 array in > my adaptec hardware raid controller of size 1.75 TB, > and just make my partitions (/, /data, /var) on that > big 2 TB array. > > But I feel like I have heard suggestions on this list > before that one should have a separate array just for > the boot and userland, and that the big monster array > should be separate from that. > > So instead, should I take two of the 8 disks and make > them a mirror, and put boot/userland on there, and > then make a raid5 out of the remaining 6 ? > > Or does it not matter at all ? > > If one is better, why ? Thanks. > If reliability is your highest priority, then you should create (as you describe above) a 2 disk RAID-1, a 5 disk RAID-5, and assign the 8th disk as a global hot-spare. Putting 8 SATA disks into a single enclosure has implications for cooling all of those drives, which in turn has implications for drive life. If I were doing it, this is exactly what I'd do. Scott From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 1 13:38:36 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E544C16A403; Fri, 1 Dec 2006 13:38:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from daichi@freebsd.org) Received: from natial.ongs.co.jp (natial.ongs.co.jp [202.216.232.58]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AE1943CAC; Fri, 1 Dec 2006 13:38:21 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from daichi@freebsd.org) Received: from [192.168.1.101] (dullmdaler.ongs.co.jp [202.216.232.62]) by natial.ongs.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D54C244C19; Fri, 1 Dec 2006 22:38:34 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <4570305A.4010908@freebsd.org> Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2006 22:38:34 +0900 From: Daichi GOTO User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (X11/20061118) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, rodrigc@crodrigues.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: daichi@freebsd.org Subject: [ANN] unionfs patchset-17 release, lock mechanism changed for robust working X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2006 13:38:37 -0000 Hi Guys! It is my pleasure and honor to announce the availability of the unionfs patchset-17. p17 have some significant improvements around the lock mechanism for robust and stable working. Patchset-17: For 7-current http://people.freebsd.org/~daichi/unionfs/unionfs-p17.diff For 6.x sorry, it is for current only. Changes in unionfs-p17.diff - Fs takes illegal access without lock of lower layer vnode if the both upper/lower layers have both vnode. To fix this problem, we change the lock mechanism to get locks for both upper/lower layer always. - Kernel gets a dead-lock easily within above upper/lower-layer-always-lock-mechanism. To avoide above dead-lock, we changed vfs_lookup.c. By that change, it always locks vnodes parent first and children second. You could see the same lock-order-control implementation around cache_lookup. - It takes the both open/close operations per kernel thread. - It takes readdir-treat-status-management per kernel thread. - It reopens vnode if needed when coping to upper layer on advlock. - mount_unionfs(8) changes option style fitting for fstab(5) style. (by rodrigc) - manual of mount_unionfs(8) was changed. (by rodrigc) The documents of those unionfs patches: http://people.freebsd.org/~daichi/unionfs/ (English) http://people.freebsd.org/~daichi/unionfs/index-ja.html (Japanese) After release of p16, some folks gave us some panic reports that indicate our implementations has a critical problem around the lock mechanism. After our long researches and discussions, we have tried to re-implement our unionfs lock mechanism. And it is done :) For unionfs lovers (including FreeSBIE developers, ports cluster managers, heavy memory-fs users, or folks use unionfs), could you try p17 please? If p17 solves that panics, we guess it is unionfs merge time for current branch. Thanks P.S. Current English document of web has some Japanese contents. We need a translator ;-) -- Daichi GOTO, http://people.freebsd.org/~daichi From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 2 12:02:38 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2F3416A403 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 2006 12:02:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nico-freebsd-fs@schottelius.org) Received: from schottelius.org (gw.ptr-62-65-141-133.customer.ch.netstream.com [62.65.141.133]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 523D643CB4 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 2006 12:02:15 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from nico-freebsd-fs@schottelius.org) Received: (qmail 10969 invoked by uid 1000); 2 Dec 2006 12:02:28 -0000 Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2006 13:02:28 +0100 From: Nico -telmich- Schottelius To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20061202120228.GB27796@schottelius.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="zx4FCpZtqtKETZ7O" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: echo $message | gpg -e $sender -s | netcat mailhost 25 X-Linux-Info: http://linux.schottelius.org/ X-Operating-System: Linux 2.6.19-hydrogenium Subject: ACL broken on all FreeBSD variants X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2006 12:02:39 -0000 --zx4FCpZtqtKETZ7O Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hey! Just choosed that provocant topic, because there seem to be no reaction on all the reports I send about FreeBSD ACLs. Just wanted to know, whether anyone REALLY uses ACLs with default entries. If so, does it really work with creating new files? All my tests say no, and I testet 5.4, 6.1, 6.2. If someone could confirm that FreeBSD does have ongoing and unfixed ACLs this would help me, so I can stop spending time on tests. Sincerly Nico P.S.:=20 I reported on freebsd-questions problems with Default ACLs on 2006-10-18, <20061018141753.GA12559@schottelius.org>. I reported on freebsd-fs problems with Default ACLs on 2006-11-23, <20061123171444.GG24205@schottelius.org>. --=20 ``...if there's one thing about Linux users, they're do-ers, not whiners.'' (A quotation of Andy Patrizio I completely agree with) --zx4FCpZtqtKETZ7O Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFcWtUuL75KpiFGIwRAiI9AJ9XIJgWr9c7lLtBgp0PMOhE+x+ykwCggLZm ZH4DeMmJqhfZc482jKLyGb8= =RYTh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --zx4FCpZtqtKETZ7O--