Le 20/09/2016 à 20:38, Chris Murphy a écrit :
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 12:19 PM, Alexandre Poux <pums...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Le 20/09/2016 à 19:54, Chris Murphy a écrit :
>>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 11:03 AM, Alexandre Poux <pums...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> If I wanted to try to edit my partitions with an hex editor, where would
>>>> I find infos on how to do that ?
>>>> I really don't want to go this way, but if this is relatively simple, it
>>>> may be worth to try.
>>> Simple is relative. First you'd need
>>> https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/On-disk_Format to get some
>>> understanding of where things are to edit, and then btrfs-map-logical
>>> to convert btrfs logical addresses to physical device and sector to
>>> know what to edit.
>>> I'd call it distinctly non-trivial and very tedious.
>> OK, another idea:
>> would it be possible to trick btrfs with a manufactured file that the
>> disk is present while it isn't ?
>> I mean, looking for a few minutes on the hexdump of my trivial test
>> partition, header of members of btrfs array seems very alike.
>> So maybe, I can make a file wich would have enough header to make btrfs
>> believe that this is my device, and then remove it as usual....
>> looks like a long shot, but it doesn't hurt to ask....
> There may be another test that applies to single profiles, that
> disallows dropping a device. I think that's the place to look next.
> The superblock is easy to copy, but you'll need the device specific
> UUID which should be locatable with btrfs-show-super -f for each
> devid. The bigger problem is that Btrfs at mount time doesn't just
> look at the superblock and then mount. It actually reads parts of each
> tree, the extent of which I don't know. And it's doing a bunch of
> sanity tests as it reads those things, including transid (generation).
> So I'm not sure how easily spoofable a fake device is going to be.
> As a practical matter, migrate it to a new volume is faster and more
> reliable. Unfortunately, the inability to mount it read write is going
> to prevent you from making read only snapshots to use with btrfs
> send/receive. What might work, is find out what on-disk modification
> btrfs-tune does to make a device a read-only seed. Again your volume
> is missing a device so btrfs-tune won't let you modify it. But if you
> could force that to happen, it's probably a very minor change to
> metadata on each device, maybe it'll act like a seed device when you
> next mount it, in which case you'll be able to add a device and
> remount it read write and then delete the seed causing migration of
> everything that does remain on the volume over to the new device. I've
> never tried anything like this so I have no idea if it'll work. And
> even in the best case I haven't tried a multiple device seed going to
> a single device sprout (is it even allowed when removing the seed?).
> So...more questions than answers.
Sorry if I wasn't clear, but with the patch mentionned earlyer, I can
get a read write mount.
What I can't do is remove the device.
As for moving data to an another volume, since it's only data and
nothing fancy (no subvolume or anything), a simple rsync would do the trick.
My problem in this case is that I don't have enough available space
elsewhere to move my data.
That's why I'm trying this hard to recover the partition...
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