Described behavior observed with: btrfs-progs 4.20.2 kernel 4.20.12 On Sun, Mar 10, 2019 at 5:09 PM Chris Murphy <li...@colorremedies.com> wrote: > > In the case where superblock 0 at 65536 is valid but stale (older than > the others): > > 1. btrfs check doesn't complain, the stale super is used for the check > 2. when mounting, super 0 is used, no complaints at mount time, fairly > quickly the newer supers are overwritten > > Is this expected? In particular, in lieu of `btrfs rescue super` > behavior which considers super 0 a bad super, and offers to fix it > from the newer ones, and when I answer y, it replaces super 0 with > newer information from the other supers. > > I think the `btrfs rescue` behavior is correct. I would expect that > all the supers are read at mount time, and if there's discrepancy that > either there's code to suspiciously sanity check the latest roots in > the newest super, or it flat out fails to mount. Mounting based on > stale super data seems risky doesn't it? > > -- > Chris Murphy
-- Chris Murphy
