On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 2:00 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > I want to bring to your attention a problem with the XFS module of grub2 since > I was told that you might not always pay attention to the bugtracker. I've > reported the bug at savannah.gnu.org as well as on the Debian BTS, so I'm > pasting the interesting snippets from the latter one for your convenience: > > > > From: Alex Malinovich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Bug#436943: another confirmation > Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 05:06:15 -0800 > > [Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)] > > On Tue, 2008-02-12 at 13:19 +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > --snip-- >> On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 02:14:55AM -0800, Alex Malinovich wrote: >> > >> > Oddly, trying to do "ls (hd0,1)/" works just fine. Yet when running >> "ls >> > (hd0,1)/boot" gives that same "out of partition error", even >> > though /boot is NOT on a separate partition. >> >> Alex, what is your filesystem in (hd0,1)/ ? >> >> Can you identify the problem if you do: >> >> set debug=all >> ls (hd0,1)/boot > > The fs on hd0,1 is xfs. I just did an fsck on it and the fs itself is > fine. > > Since it's hard to paste a good amount of code that happens at boot, > here's what I get when running grub-emu from the console with the above > commands. I'll do a reboot later and verify that I get the same errors. > If I see anything different on a regular boot I'll send in a follow-up > email. > > One thing that might be potentially useful, when just doing the ls > without the debug=all, I actually get a little bit of output prior to > the out of partition error. In this particular case the output is: > > grub> ls (hd0,1)/boot > ?^^ ?^^ ^Q^_ > > error: out of partition > grub> > > Not sure what those extra characters are about, but they are consistent > across multiple runs of grub-emu. > > So, running ls after setting debug=all I get: > > grub> ls (hd0,1)/boot > --snip-- > /home/rmh/hacking/grub/svn/upload/grub2-1.96+20080210/kern/disk.c:364: > Reading > `hd0,1'... > /home/rmh/hacking/grub/svn/upload/grub2-1.96+20080210/kern/disk.c:371: Read > out > of range: sector 0xffffffffef400000 (out of partition). > > /home/rmh/hacking/grub/svn/upload/grub2-1.96+20080210/kern/disk.c:364: of > range: sector 0xffffffffef400000 (out of partition). > --snip-- > > repeating a few hundred times. There's some other scattered output but > it's very hard to make out. I do see some lines about detecting and > opening the xfs filesystem early in the log. > > > > From: Niels Boehm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: grub-pc: xfs.mod reads some directories incorrectly > Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 08:15:33 +0200 > > Package: grub-pc > Version: 1.96+20080512-1 > Followup-For: Bug #436943 > > > Hi, > > grub2 fails for me in the aforementioned manner. It is unable to read > anything from /boot or /boot/grub which are both on my root partition with > an xfs file system. > > Trying to ls some directories, I find that some read without problem > (apparently ones containing only a few entries, like / /mnt /media /lib64 > for example) and others produce garbled output and the "out of partition" > error (ones with many entries, like /boot /boot/grub /etc /bin for example). > > I checked the root fs with /usr/sbin/xfs_check, but it looks alright. > > And if I remember correctly, I created the root fs not long ago, so it > should have quite recent data structures. The log being version 2 confirms > that: > > # xfs_info / > meta-data=/dev/root isize=256 agcount=4, agsize=64510 blks > = sectsz=512 attr=2 > data = bsize=4096 blocks=258040, imaxpct=25 > = sunit=0 swidth=0 blks > naming =version 2 bsize=4096 > log =internal bsize=4096 blocks=1200, version=2 > = sectsz=512 sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=0 > realtime =none extsz=4096 blocks=0, rtextents=0 > > > > From: Niels Boehm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: grub-pc: missing mapping from fs-block-no. to disk-block-no. in xfs.c > Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 14:50:36 +0200 > > Package: grub-pc > Followup-For: Bug #436943 > > > Okay, I hunted the problem down myself. It's a missing mapping from the file > system block numbering scheme ((agno << agbits) | block_in_ag) to the > on-partition block numbering (agno * agsize + block_in_ag) in the > grub_xfs_read_block() function. > > It would affect all users who have a partition with more than one allocation > group with an agsize which is not a power of 2. > The problem arises when grub encounters files with blocks not on ag#0 and > directories which are extent lists not stored on ag#0. > > I changed the offending file like that: > > ---- CUT HERE ---- > --- grub2-1.96+20080512/fs/xfs.c 2008-02-02 15:15:31.000000000 +0100 > +++ xfs.c_Niels 2008-06-28 12:40:39.487565975 +0200 > @@ -162,4 +162,8 @@ > (grub_be_to_cpu64 (ino) >> GRUB_XFS_INO_AGBITS (data)) > > +#define GRUB_XFS_FSB_TO_BLOCK(data, fsb) \ > + (((fsb) >> (data)->sblock.log2_agblk) * (data)->agsize \ > + + ((fsb) & ((1 << (data)->sblock.log2_agblk) - 1))) > + > #define GRUB_XFS_EXTENT_OFFSET(exts,ex) \ > ((grub_be_to_cpu32 (exts[ex][0]) & ~(1 << 31)) << 23 \ > @@ -309,5 +313,5 @@ > grub_free (leaf); > > - return ret; > + return GRUB_XFS_FSB_TO_BLOCK(node->data, ret); > } > > ---- CUT HERE ---- > > The patch works fine for me, but I can't tell if I missed any intricacies, > since I'm not into grub development. > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Bug#436943: grub-pc: xfs.mod reads some directories incorrectly > Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 18:36:08 +0200 > > On Sunday 29 June 2008, Robert Millan wrote: >> The version you're using (1.96+20080512-1) is a bit old. Could you check >> if this problem is reproducible with the sid one? Or, since I notice you >> sent this upstream (thanks!), with latest CVS. > > It the same with 1.96+20080626-1. And I also had a look at the source of the > CVS version and it looks like the mapping is still missing there (tho it's a > bit strange that they didn't notice it when they added uuid detection to > xfs.c - maybe they happen to have agsizes that are a power of 2), but I'm not > sure. I'd prefer to stick to the normal packages, since I don't really feel > at home with package maintenance stuff.
Hi, Thanks for your discovery, your patch seems fine to me. -- Bean _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
