On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 05:45:59PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 5:25 PM, Sean Greenslade
> <s...@seangreenslade.com> wrote:
> > In the mean time, is there any way to make the kernel more verbose about
> > btrfs errors? It would be nice to see, for example, what was in the
> > transaction that failed, or at least what files / metadata it was
> > touching.
> No idea. Maybe one of the compile time options:
> This also requires mount options, either check_int or check_int_data
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/846462/
> Actually, even before that maybe if you did a 'btrfs-debug-tree /dev/sdX'
> That might explode in the vicinity of the problem. Thing is, btrfs
> check doesn't see anything wrong with the metadata, so chances are
> debug-tree won't either.

Hmm, I'll probably have a go at compiling the latest mainline kernel
with CONFIG_BTRFS_DEBUG enabled. It certainly can't hurt to try.

And as you suspected, btrfs-debug-tree didn't explode / error out on me.
I didn't thoroughly inspect the output (as I have very little
understanding of the btrfs internals), but it all seemed OK.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to