headers
Andreas Vogler | 11 Aug 2012 16:59
Picon

bad version from xfs_repair after raid crash

Hi all,

we had a crash of a raid 5 system. After rebuilding we could access one of  two partitions. Upon mounting the
second parttion we got an error "mount: Structure needs cleaning". So we tried using xfs_repair.

Xfs_repair returns: "bad primary superblock - bad version number !!!"

and tries to find a secondary superblock but gives up after scanning the volume.

Looking at the superblock with xfs_db looks good as far as I can tell. Can anybody give me a hint what "bad
version number" means?

Thank you very much in advance.

  Andreas Vogler

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs <at> oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Eric Sandeen | 11 Aug 2012 23:45
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: bad version from xfs_repair after raid crash

On 8/11/12 9:59 AM, Andreas Vogler wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> we had a crash of a raid 5 system. After rebuilding we could access one of  two partitions. Upon mounting the
second parttion we got an error "mount: Structure needs cleaning". So we tried using xfs_repair.
> 
> Xfs_repair returns: "bad primary superblock - bad version number !!!"
> 
> and tries to find a secondary superblock but gives up after scanning the volume.
> 
> Looking at the superblock with xfs_db looks good as far as I can tell. Can anybody give me a hint what "bad
version number" means?

There is a version number in the superblock itself, which must have features recognized by repair.

Is your xfsprogs version up to date?

You could also include another email with the output from xfs_db -c "sb 0" -c "p" /dev/blah

-Eric

> Thank you very much in advance.
> 
>   Andreas Vogler
> 
> _______________________________________________
> xfs mailing list
> xfs <at> oss.sgi.com
> http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Andreas Vogler | 12 Aug 2012 09:49
Picon

AW: bad version from xfs_repair after raid crash


> Is your xfsprogs version up to date?

I guess the xfsprogs are rather old but they should be on the same level as the filesystem as they are part oft
he same distro (OpenFiler 2.3, package is called xfsprogs=2.6.25-4-0.1).

> You could also include another email with the output from xfs_db -c "sb 0" -c "p" /dev/blah

Here ist he output of xfs_db:

magicnum = 0x58465342
blocksize = 4096
dblocks = 332800000
rblocks = 0
rextents = 0
uuid = 567f4c2f-ce9a-42a3-bbc2-e791cf43f8ae
logstart = 268435460
rootino = 128
rbmino = 129
rsumino = 130
rextsize = 1
agblocks = 83200000
agcount = 4
rbmblocks = 0
logblocks = 32768
versionnum = 0xb4a4
sectsize = 512
inodesize = 256
inopblock = 16
fname = "\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000"
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Dave Chinner | 12 Aug 2012 23:37

Re: bad version from xfs_repair after raid crash

On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 09:49:48AM +0200, Andreas Vogler wrote:
> 
> > Is your xfsprogs version up to date?
> 
> 
> I guess the xfsprogs are rather old but they should be on the same level as the filesystem as they are part oft
he same distro (OpenFiler 2.3, package is called xfsprogs=2.6.25-4-0.1).

That's -very- old:

-- Nathan Scott <nathans <at> debian.org>  Tue, 29 Mar 2005 11:57:57 +1000

xfsprogs (2.6.26-1) unstable; urgency=low

  * New upstream release.
  * Man page updates (closes: #295397)
  * Fix compilation with gcc version 4 (closes: #297876)
  * Switch build dependency from readline4 to readline5.

> > You could also include another email with the output from xfs_db -c "sb 0" -c "p" /dev/blah
> 
> Here ist he output of xfs_db:
> 
> magicnum = 0x58465342
> blocksize = 4096
> dblocks = 332800000
> rblocks = 0
> rextents = 0
> uuid = 567f4c2f-ce9a-42a3-bbc2-e791cf43f8ae
> logstart = 268435460
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Andreas Vogler | 13 Aug 2012 13:02
Picon

AW: bad version from xfs_repair after raid crash

> So, yeah, upgrade your userspace to something recent, and it will just work.

Ok, the most recent xfs_repair doesn't complain about the version and at least starts repairing even
though the system seems extremely corrupt. Thanks.

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs <at> oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
Permalink | Reply |

Gmane