| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
krumpf
Apprentice
Joined: 15 Jul 2018
Posts: 199
|
 Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2025 9:55 pm Post subject: Weird non fatal issue after SSD upgrade |
 |
|
Hi all,
I changed my system SSD for something newer (and bigger), booted from live usb driver, rsync the old partitions to the new ones, reinstalled grub, etc.. etc.. everything works but I got an error in dmesg
| Code: | exFAT-fs (sda2): invalid boot record signature
exFAT-fs (sda2): failed to read boot sector
exFAT-fs (sda2): failed to recognize exfat type |
Thing is, I'm not using exFat file system on any mounted partition (I got a couple usb drives formatted in exfat so I can copy files from/to Windows, but they're not slotted)
lsblk -f
| Code: | sda
├─sda1 vfat FAT32 EFI 2344-8EE7 446.8M 13% /efi
├─sda2 xfs root dcbf42c3-4a76-4201-96c9-d568fc0eaad8 23.2G 42% /
├─sda3 xfs home cbb88a1e-65e9-4ec1-8336-7a8343457d95 22.7G 43% /home
└─sda4 xfs data 876ec83b-7054-4619-bbf1-b9f8802e0d25 258.2G 33% /mnt/data |
dmesg -t | grep sda
| Code: | sd 5:0:0:0: [sda] 976773168 512-byte logical blocks: (500 GB/466 GiB)
sd 5:0:0:0: [sda] Write Protect is off
sd 5:0:0:0: [sda] Mode Sense: 00 3a 00 00
sd 5:0:0:0: [sda] Write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA
sd 5:0:0:0: [sda] Preferred minimum I/O size 512 bytes
sda: sda1 sda2 sda3 sda4
sd 5:0:0:0: [sda] Attached SCSI disk
exFAT-fs (sda2): invalid boot record signature
exFAT-fs (sda2): failed to read boot sector
exFAT-fs (sda2): failed to recognize exfat type
XFS (sda2): Mounting V5 Filesystem dcbf42c3-4a76-4201-96c9-d568fc0eaad8
XFS (sda2): Ending clean mount
XFS (sda3): Mounting V5 Filesystem cbb88a1e-65e9-4ec1-8336-7a8343457d95
XFS (sda3): Ending clean mount
XFS (sda4): Mounting V5 Filesystem 876ec83b-7054-4619-bbf1-b9f8802e0d25
XFS (sda4): Ending clean mount |
Could anyone explain me why do I get that complaint about exfat, and how to get rid of it ?
_________________
Dragon Princess Music Games Heroes and villains |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Anon-E-moose
Watchman
Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 6226
Location: Dallas area
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2025 11:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
what does "fdisk -l /dev/sda" show?
_________________
UM780, 6.12 zen kernel, gcc 13, openrc, wayland |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
grknight
Retired Dev
Joined: 20 Feb 2015
Posts: 2023
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2025 11:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| krumpf wrote: | Hi all,
I changed my system SSD for something newer (and bigger), booted from live usb driver, rsync the old partitions to the new ones, reinstalled grub, etc.. etc.. everything works but I got an error in dmesg
| Code: | exFAT-fs (sda2): invalid boot record signature
exFAT-fs (sda2): failed to read boot sector
exFAT-fs (sda2): failed to recognize exfat type |
Thing is, I'm not using exFat file system on any mounted partition (I got a couple usb drives formatted in exfat so I can copy files from/to Windows, but they're not slotted) |
For a root FS, the kernel enumerates the type from its available, known types until one succeeds or all fail.
To stop the kernel from guessing, add rootfstype=xfs (in your case) to the kernel command line of your loader. This will stop the exFAT messages. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
krumpf
Apprentice
Joined: 15 Jul 2018
Posts: 199
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 16, 2025 6:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| grknight wrote: | For a root FS, the kernel enumerates the type from its available, known types until one succeeds or all fail.
To stop the kernel from guessing, add rootfstype=xfs (in your case) to the kernel command line of your loader. This will stop the exFAT messages. |
That worked ! Thanks 
I suppose the enumeration is done in alphabetic order ? Then how come there's no error message for ext4 filesystem ? My kernel is compiled with exfat, ext4, ntfs, and xfs support.
_________________
Dragon Princess Music Games Heroes and villains |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hu
Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 23121
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 16, 2025 3:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| As I read the relevant kernel source, filesystems are tried in the order they were registered, which may not be alphabetical. See mount_block_root -> list_bdev_fs_names for where the list of candidate filesystems is obtained. See register_filesystem for how entries are added to the list. See all the many callers of register_filesystem for where each of them is added. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ralphred
l33t
Joined: 31 Dec 2013
Posts: 725
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 16, 2025 3:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hu wrote: | | filesystems are tried in the order they were registered, which may not be alphabetical |
And XFS is older than EXT4, makes sense. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
krumpf
Apprentice
Joined: 15 Jul 2018
Posts: 199
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 16, 2025 7:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ralphred wrote: | | Hu wrote: | | filesystems are tried in the order they were registered, which may not be alphabetical |
And XFS is older than EXT4, makes sense. |
But exFAT is relatively new compared to xfs/ext4 - according to wikipedia linux supported exfat through fuse since 2009, but the native driver appeared in kernel in november 2019. So I suppose the filesystem enumeration is not in chronological order.
@Hu, not that I don't want to read the source code, but mostly I can't, I'm kinda illiterate when it comes to read C (or most languages actually  ). Plus tbh, I don't really know which files, I managed to find the error messages in /usr/src/linux/fs/exfat/super.c but that's all I can do. I mean, my developer skills are limited to really basic scripting 
Still, thanks for taking some time and for your explanations
_________________
Dragon Princess Music Games Heroes and villains |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hu
Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 23121
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 16, 2025 7:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Registration order is whatever order the relevant maintainers set it to be, as modified by what is actually built into the kernel. I stopped trying to trace what the exact order would be, and left my notes above for anyone who wanted to continue running it down. I did notice that the registration list is used to supply /proc/filesystems. I think that shows them in the same order that the guessing function returns them, though the guessing logic excludes filesystems marked as nodev. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
krumpf
Apprentice
Joined: 15 Jul 2018
Posts: 199
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Kernel & Hardware
