Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2012 20:53:07 -0800 From: Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com> To: Joe Holden <jwhlists@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: UFS corruption panic Message-ID: <CAGH67wRygBeWa6iScd3sjp=-bqhe6k-fyE=WpQQYM5wJP8bwGQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAD-04WOKH6yb0tjcM=pu86kzTfFej%2Bc0E-v9AMC9VyEDn4HSOg@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAD-04WOKH6yb0tjcM=pu86kzTfFej%2Bc0E-v9AMC9VyEDn4HSOg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 8:20 PM, Joe Holden <jwhlists@gmail.com> wrote:
> =A0Guys....
>
> Is a panic **really** appropriate for a filesystem that isn't even in
> fstab?
>
> ie;
> panic: ufs_dirbad: /mnt: bad dir ino 3229 at offset 0: mangled entry
>
> Which happened to be an file-backed md volume that got changed as I forgo=
t
> to unmount it beforehand, however as a result there is now inconsistencie=
s
> and probably data corruption or even missing data on other important
> filesystems (ie; /, /var etc) because there wasn't even a sync or any kin=
d
> of other sensible behaviour.
>
> This is on a production box, which also has gmirror so I now have no idea
> what state it's going to be in when I can get a display attached.
>
> Surely the appropriate response here for non-critical filesystems is to
> warn and suggest manually inspecting it as turning a working production b=
ox
> into one thats dead in the water seems a little extreme.
That's usually the sign that something went bonkers with the
underlying filesystem to the extent that it's corrupt beyond all
repair. In this case though, I wouldn't necessarily say that the
md-backed filesystem is the one that's corrupt -- it might be the root
filesystem.
What version of FreeBSD are you using and what do you have enabled
in the filesystem (FFS, UFS1, UFS2, SU, SUJ..)?
Thanks,
-Garrett
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAGH67wRygBeWa6iScd3sjp=-bqhe6k-fyE=WpQQYM5wJP8bwGQ>