[Ocfs2-tools-devel] Patch for journal truncate of ocfs2-tools.

[Sunil Mushran]

chain_cpg is not a "corruption" per se eventhough fsck
treats and fixes it as one. That mkfs sets cpg to < max
possible when the device fits in one cluster group is not
ideal but not incorrect either.

Is running fsck -fy the first time round not possible? It
will take care of this problem.

Marcos, what was the size of the volume and the parameters
passed to mkfs. I want to be sure that the problem you
encountered is the same that Tao is referring to.

tao.ma wrote:
> Marcos E. Matsunaga wrote:
>> Tao,
>>
>> Sorry about the late. I ran into some problems and finally got to run 
>> some tests today with tunefs-test.sh and the truncate program. The 
>> tunefs seems to be working fine.  Didn't find any unexpected problem 
>> with it.
>>
>> With the truncate, I started the script. At first it was error 
>> because it doesn't have the test_truncate binary set in the script. I 
>> did that, and it started and I let it run. After a few hours running, 
>> it showed nothing at all, like it was frozen. Hitting enter where it 
>> was running, showed an fsck error. I tried again and it does the same 
>> soon after I hit enter. I don't know if that's the expected behavior, 
>> but I found a little weird.
> I found the same problem as you when I ran it the first time. ;)
> It may because that your test volume is too small. When we have 
> blocksize=4K and clustersize=1M(maybe smaller, it depends on the real 
> size of your volume) then you may have only one group descriptor in 
> your "//global_bitmap". So after the volume is formatted, fsck.ocfs2 
> will find an error of "CHAIN_CPG"(You may try it by using -b 4K -C 1M 
> to format your volume and run fsck.ocfs2 immediatly after your format 
> to check whether this problem exists). I haven't added the option "-y" 
> in fsck.ocfs2 since a new-formatted volume shouldn't have any errors, 
> and that causes the program waiting for the input and looks like 
> freeze. So this problem isn't concerned with ocfs2_truncate and you 
> may use a larger volume(40G is enough) and have another try.
>
> Sunil, I saw your comments in the function 
> "maybe_fix_clusters_per_group" about this problem, and I remembered 
> that  you added it for the offline resize. So we have to answer "n" 
> for this output in fsck.ocfs2, right?
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ocfs2-tools-devel mailing list
> Ocfs2-tools-devel at oss.oracle.com
> http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs2-tools-devel