lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20130503131421.GC32297@thunk.org> Date: Fri, 3 May 2013 09:14:21 -0400 From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu> To: Stephen Elliott <techweb@...world.com> Cc: 'Andreas Dilger' <adilger@...ger.ca>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2nd Attempt - FSCK Errors What you've shown us makes me suspicious about whether the hardware device is sane or not. In the previous e2fsck run, it set i_size to a non-zero value. Yet when debugfs tries to read the same inode, it's now seeing all zero's. So that implies the disk (or software raid device; you haven't been clear what the underlying storage is for this file system) is not returning the same information for a particular block as was previously written. If the underlying block device is not stable, there really is nothing for e2fsck to do. You might want to check /var/log/messages for any error messages relating to the underlying storage device(s). If you're seeing I/O errors in the log files, that would be another hint. At this point, my recommendation to you is to find a separate disk (or RAID array if necessary) which is as big as the underlying disk, and do an image copy (via dd or ddrescue) to a known-good storage device, and then retry the e2fsck on this copy of the file system. Regards, - Ted -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists