JFS partition "Dirty but looks Clean" - OS2

This is a discussion on JFS partition "Dirty but looks Clean" - OS2 ; There are eight JFS partitions on my eCS v1.1 system; at boot time, all are reported as being "Clean". Six of these partitions are also recognized by a Linux system on the box, suggesting that something may be not entirely ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: JFS partition "Dirty but looks Clean"

  1. JFS partition "Dirty but looks Clean"

    There are eight JFS partitions on my eCS v1.1 system; at boot time,
    all are reported as being "Clean". Six of these partitions are also
    recognized by a Linux system on the box, suggesting that something may
    be not entirely right with the other two.

    Trying to discover what it might be, I ran chkdsk on all eight, one at
    a time (I know that chkdsk is not able fully to analyze JSF
    partitions, but I was stumbling about, looking for clues to the
    difference). For six of the partitions, chkdsk immediately reported
    "Clean"; for the other two, it had to scan, ponder a bit, and report
    that the partition is "Dirty but looks Clean" (or words to that
    effect), so these two partitions are indeed dicey in some way, and
    Linux's failure to recognize them is not a Linux quirk.

    What might be happening in those partitions? How might it be possible
    to get them "Squeaky Clean"?

    --
    Stan Goodman
    Qiryat Tiv'on
    Israel


  2. Re: JFS partition "Dirty but looks Clean"

    On Mon, 14 May 2007 16:10:21 UTC in comp.os.os2.misc, "Stan Goodman"
    wrote:

    > There are eight JFS partitions on my eCS v1.1 system; at boot time,
    > all are reported as being "Clean". Six of these partitions are also
    > recognized by a Linux system on the box, suggesting that something may
    > be not entirely right with the other two.
    >
    > Trying to discover what it might be, I ran chkdsk on all eight, one at
    > a time (I know that chkdsk is not able fully to analyze JSF
    > partitions, but I was stumbling about, looking for clues to the
    > difference). For six of the partitions, chkdsk immediately reported
    > "Clean"; for the other two, it had to scan, ponder a bit, and report
    > that the partition is "Dirty but looks Clean" (or words to that
    > effect), so these two partitions are indeed dicey in some way, and
    > Linux's failure to recognize them is not a Linux quirk.
    >
    > What might be happening in those partitions? How might it be possible
    > to get them "Squeaky Clean"?


    What's the JFS blocksize of the two 'missing' partitions? Linux only works on
    OS/2 JFS partitions that have a 4096 blocksize.

    Did you specify /F on the chkdsk? Without this it will not unmount a mounted
    partition and you'll get the 'dirty but looks clean' message.


    --
    Trevor Hemsley, Brighton, UK
    Trevor dot Hemsley at ntlworld dot com

  3. Re: JFS partition "Dirty but looks Clean"

    Hi Stan

    Stan Goodman wrote:
    > There are eight JFS partitions on my eCS v1.1 system; at boot time,
    > all are reported as being "Clean". Six of these partitions are also
    > recognized by a Linux system on the box, suggesting that something may
    > be not entirely right with the other two.
    >
    > Trying to discover what it might be, I ran chkdsk on all eight, one at
    > a time (I know that chkdsk is not able fully to analyze JSF
    > partitions, but I was stumbling about, looking for clues to the
    > difference). For six of the partitions, chkdsk immediately reported
    > "Clean"; for the other two, it had to scan, ponder a bit, and report
    > that the partition is "Dirty but looks Clean" (or words to that
    > effect), so these two partitions are indeed dicey in some way, and
    > Linux's failure to recognize them is not a Linux quirk.
    >
    > What might be happening in those partitions? How might it be possible
    > to get them "Squeaky Clean"?
    >



    You can force a chkdsk at boot that will work. I have 2 jfs drives, J:
    and K: and both became a little "flaky" a few weeks back but the
    standard Autocheck line was not correcting the problem(s).

    Using this line instead forced the chkdsk to actually work:-

    IFS=H:\OS2\JFS.IFS /LW:5,20,4 /AUTOCHECK:+J+K


    I think it means do a chkdsk even if the disk looks clean. The important
    bit is that it worked, no more flakiness when reading/writing to J: or
    K: :-)

    Regards

    Pete

  4. Re: JFS partition "Dirty but looks Clean"

    On Mon, 14 May 2007 20:40:03 UTC, Peter Brown
    opined:
    > Hi Stan
    >
    > Stan Goodman wrote:
    > > There are eight JFS partitions on my eCS v1.1 system; at boot time,
    > > all are reported as being "Clean". Six of these partitions are also
    > > recognized by a Linux system on the box, suggesting that something may
    > > be not entirely right with the other two.
    > >
    > > Trying to discover what it might be, I ran chkdsk on all eight, one at
    > > a time (I know that chkdsk is not able fully to analyze JSF
    > > partitions, but I was stumbling about, looking for clues to the
    > > difference). For six of the partitions, chkdsk immediately reported
    > > "Clean"; for the other two, it had to scan, ponder a bit, and report
    > > that the partition is "Dirty but looks Clean" (or words to that
    > > effect), so these two partitions are indeed dicey in some way, and
    > > Linux's failure to recognize them is not a Linux quirk.
    > >
    > > What might be happening in those partitions? How might it be possible
    > > to get them "Squeaky Clean"?
    > >

    >
    >
    > You can force a chkdsk at boot that will work. I have 2 jfs drives, J:
    > and K: and both became a little "flaky" a few weeks back but the
    > standard Autocheck line was not correcting the problem(s).
    >
    > Using this line instead forced the chkdsk to actually work:-
    >
    > IFS=H:\OS2\JFS.IFS /LW:5,20,4 /AUTOCHECK:+J+K


    Worth a try, and good to know for the future. What does the
    "LW:5,20,4" part mean? I get no help from ,

    > I think it means do a chkdsk even if the disk looks clean. The important
    > bit is that it worked, no more flakiness when reading/writing to J: or
    > K: :-)
    >
    > Regards
    >
    > Pete


    --
    Stan Goodman
    Qiryat Tiv'on
    Israel


  5. Re: JFS partition "Dirty but looks Clean"

    On Mon, 14 May 2007 20:19:28 UTC, "Trevor Hemsley"
    opined:
    > On Mon, 14 May 2007 16:10:21 UTC in comp.os.os2.misc, "Stan Goodman"
    > wrote:
    >
    > > There are eight JFS partitions on my eCS v1.1 system; at boot time,
    > > all are reported as being "Clean". Six of these partitions are also
    > > recognized by a Linux system on the box, suggesting that something may
    > > be not entirely right with the other two.
    > >
    > > Trying to discover what it might be, I ran chkdsk on all eight, one at
    > > a time (I know that chkdsk is not able fully to analyze JSF
    > > partitions, but I was stumbling about, looking for clues to the
    > > difference). For six of the partitions, chkdsk immediately reported
    > > "Clean"; for the other two, it had to scan, ponder a bit, and report
    > > that the partition is "Dirty but looks Clean" (or words to that
    > > effect), so these two partitions are indeed dicey in some way, and
    > > Linux's failure to recognize them is not a Linux quirk.
    > >
    > > What might be happening in those partitions? How might it be possible
    > > to get them "Squeaky Clean"?

    >
    > What's the JFS blocksize of the two 'missing' partitions? Linux only works on
    > OS/2 JFS partitions that have a 4096 blocksize.


    The blocksize is 4096 for all eight JFS partitions; there is no
    difference there between the Clean ones and the Dirty/Clean ones.

    > Did you specify /F on the chkdsk? Without this it will not unmount a mounted
    > partition and you'll get the 'dirty but looks clean' message.


    I didn't. But I didn't add /f for any of the eight. But this tells me
    how to unmount, and how to get a reliable CHKDSK response from a JFS
    partition.

    Running CHKDSK /F with each of the doubtful partitions ended with a
    line saying:
    "LVM reports 0 bad blocks. Of these, 0 have been transferred to the
    JFS Bad Block List."

    I think it means to say that it found something subtle, fixed it, and
    didn't tag any bad blocks.

    Thanks...

    --
    Stan Goodman
    Qiryat Tiv'on
    Israel


  6. Re: JFS partition "Dirty but looks Clean"

    Stan Goodman writes:

    > Peter Brown wrote:


    >> IFS=H:\OS2\JFS.IFS /LW:5,20,4 /AUTOCHECK:+J+K


    > Worth a try, and good to know for the future. What does the
    > "LW:5,20,4" part mean? I get no help from ,


    You do get help from the TECHNOTE.TXT file in your installation
    directory:



    The parameters for the Journaled File System (JFS) installable file system
    are as follows:

    IFS=jfs.ifs /L:OFF
    IFS=jfs.ifs /L:synctime,maxage,bufferidle

    JFS ignores any characters between the L (or l) and the colon; valid flags
    are /L: /LAZY: /LW: /lazywrite: and so on.

    OFF
    Forces asynchronous writes to be immediately initiated.

    Synctime
    The interval at which the synchronous thread runs. The default is 64.

    maxage
    The longest time that a frequently-modified file is kept in cache. The
    default is synctime*4.

    bufferidle
    The time indicating a recent change. Changes newer than this value are
    not written unless the last write was older than maxage. The default
    is MIN(1,synctime/8)

    Note:
    All parameters are in seconds.


+ Reply to Thread