Sorry if it might be a bit OT, but I need immediate help...
I am having some problems with e2fs utils v1.25 and kernel 2.4.13 (any
kernel?) and was wondering if you could help clear some things out for me.
What i wanted to do is very simple:
1) format an empty ext2 partiton (first doing badblocks on it)
2) re-install some software on it
I couldn't do it "properly" and here's why:
I start with a dump of my partition table:
##########################################################################
FDISK
##########################################################################
:# fdisk -l /dev/hdc
Disk /dev/hdc: 255 heads, 63 sectors, 789 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 bytes
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/hdc1 * 1 399 3204936 b Win95 FAT32
/dev/hdc2 400 529 1044225 e Win95 FAT16 (LBA)
/dev/hdc3 530 659 1044225 83 Linux native
/dev/hdc4 660 789 1044225 83 Linux native
# fdisk -l -u /dev/hdc
Disk /dev/hdc: 255 heads, 63 sectors, 789 cylinders
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 bytes
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/hdc1 * 63 6409934 3204936 b Win95 FAT32
/dev/hdc2 6409935 8498384 1044225 e Win95 FAT16 (LBA)
/dev/hdc3 8498385 10586834 1044225 83 Linux native
/dev/hdc4 10586835 12675284 1044225 83 Linux native
Next, I tried to badblock the partition space before I mke2fs.
2 weird things happened:
1) badblocks kept on trying to access a block beyond the end of the
device/partition (1044226) !! Thank god it wasn't allowed to do it. Below
is the output from the badblocks run and also from my /var/log/messages
(please look after the badblock output where I posted parts of my
/var/log/messages)
2) (NOT SO IMPORTANT) even though badblocks finished, it never showed me on
stdout the badblock numbers!! I had to rerun with -o badblocks.txt to get
the
actual numbers. Is this a bug ? Now that I think of it a second time,
the badblock # was 10440224, which might mean this: Note the "<----WTF
???" comments. Maybe when it was printed out on screen, it was written
over by the blocks counter (due to me using the -s switch) and thus I
couldn't "see it" on screen.
Does my thinking here make sense?
Should badblocks display the bad blocks at the end of the run if the -s
switch is used ?
##########################################################################
BADBLOCKS
##########################################################################
# badblocks -c64 -svw /dev/hdc3
Checking for bad blocks in read-write mode
>From block 0 to 1044225
Writing pattern 0xaaaaaaaa: done
Reading and comparing: 104422472/ 1044225 <--- WTF ????
done
Writing pattern 0x55555555: done
Reading and comparing: done
Writing pattern 0xffffffff: done
Reading and comparing: done
Writing pattern 0x00000000: done
Reading and comparing: done
Pass completed, 1 bad blocks found.
my /var/log/messages says:
#at the end of each "Writing pattern 0x...."
Dec 3 20:25:39 kernel: attempt to access beyond end of device
Dec 3 20:25:39 kernel: 16:03: rw=0, want=1044226, limit=1044225
#at the end of each "Reading and comparing: done"
Dec 3 20:28:03 kernel: attempt to access beyond end of device
Dec 3 20:28:03 kernel: 16:03: rw=0, want=1044226, limit=1044225
Well after I was done with badblocks -o I went on to e2fsck with 1024byte
blocks (I am gonna have lots of small files). But that wouldn't fly. The
output below tells why, but I am not sure why it would be having short
reads that early into the partition...
##########################################################################
MKE2FS 1024
##########################################################################
# mke2fs -b 0124 -m 1 /dev/hdc3
Filesystem label=
OS type: Linux
Block size=1024 (log=0)
Fragment size=1024 (log=0)
131072 inodes, 1044225 blocks
10442 blocks (1.00%) reserved for the super user
First data block=1
128 block groups
8192 blocks per group, 8192 fragments per group
1024 inodes per group
Superblock backups stored on blocks:
8193, 24577, 40961, 57345, 73729, 204801, 221185, 401409, 663553,
1024001
Writing inode tables: 0/128^H^H^H^H^H^H^H
Could not write 8 blocks in inode table starting at 8:
Attempt to write block from filesystem resulted in short write
So I tried 2048byte blocks, but I got yet another problem this time! It
ignores the badblock (1044224) saying it's out of range!? (even though the
partition has 1044225 blocks, and even though I never specified the
start/end blocks myself (i let it auto-figure it out)). Any ideas ?
Should my partitions have been even-numbered in block size ?
##########################################################################
MKE2FS 2048
##########################################################################
# mke2fs -c -l /tmp/bad -b 2048 -m 1 /dev/hdc3
mke2fs 1.25 (20-Sep-2001)
Filesystem label=
OS type: Linux
Block size=2048 (log=1)
Fragment size=2048 (log=1)
130560 inodes, 522112 blocks
5221 blocks (1.00%) reserved for the super user
First data block=0
32 block groups
16384 blocks per group, 16384 fragments per group
4080 inodes per group
Superblock backups stored on blocks:
16384, 49152, 81920, 114688, 147456, 409600, 442368
Bad block 1044224 out of range; ignored. <--- WTF ???
Checking for bad blocks (read-only test): done
Writing inode tables: done
Writing superblocks and filesystem accounting information: done
This filesystem will be automatically checked every 38 mounts or
180 days, whichever comes first. Use tune2fs -c or -i to override.
##########################################################################
Any feedback/help would be much appreciated.
Thanks in advance
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Dec 15 2001 - 21:00:12 EST