Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Add testcase for fundamental scrub recovery

At 12/05/2016 03:07 PM, Eryu Guan wrote: On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 04:38:08PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: Despite the scrub test cases in fstests, there is not even one test case which really checked if scrub can recover data. In fact, btrfs scrub for RAID56 will even corrupt correct data stripes.

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Add testcase for fundamental scrub recovery

On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 04:38:08PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > Despite the scrub test cases in fstests, there is not even one test case > which really checked if scrub can recover data. > > In fact, btrfs scrub for RAID56 will even corrupt correct data stripes. > > So let's start from the needed

Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] fstests: common: rename _require_btrfs to _require_btrfs_subcommand

On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 04:38:09PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > Rename _require_btrfs() to _require_btrfs_subcommand() to avoid > confusion, as all other _require_btrfs_* has a quite clear suffix, like > _require_btrfs_mkfs_feature() or _require_btrfs_fs_feature(). > > Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo

Re: [PATCH 1/2] btrfs-progs: Correct value printed by assertions/BUG_ON/WARN_ON

Hi, Goldwyn and David, This patch seems to cause btrfs test case 023 to fail. Bisect leads me to this patch. $ ./btrfs check ~/quota_balance_loop_backref.raw.restored Checking filesystem on /home/adam/quota_balance_loop_backref.raw.restored UUID: c33c5ce3-3ad9-4320-9201-c337c04e0051 checking

Re: btrfs repair and zero-log doesn't seem to do anything

> Maybe -D would list all the file structures? I tried that first but didn't see anything, but when combined with -v it shows the files that would have been restored. e.g. # btrfs restore -v -D --path-regex '^/(|Documents(|/.*))$' /dev/mapper/data-0 /tmp Awesome, big thanks for your help!

[no subject]

subscribe linux-btrfs -- 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

Re: btrfs repair and zero-log doesn't seem to do anything

At 12/05/2016 11:49 AM, Calle Kabo wrote: IMHO there will be 2 alternative method to recover: 1) Btrfs restore The safest method to recover files. Although it may need a lot of space to restore recovered data. 2) Btrfs check --init-extent-tree This will use fs tree to try to

Re: Re: btrfs repair and zero-log doesn't seem to do anything

> IMHO there will be 2 alternative method to recover: > > 1) Btrfs restore >The safest method to recover files. >Although it may need a lot of space to restore recovered data. > > 2) Btrfs check --init-extent-tree >This will use fs tree to try to rebuild the extent tree. >I don't

Re: btrfs repair and zero-log doesn't seem to do anything

At 12/05/2016 10:28 AM, Calle Kabo wrote: Hi, I've got a Netgear NAS with an encrypted 4 disk RAID5 setup. One of the hard drives was emailing me about errors so I swapped it out before it died. While syncing another disk died. So I've cloned the disk I replaced before it died and managed to

Re: btrfs fi du is unreliable

Henk Slager posted on Sun, 04 Dec 2016 23:17:23 +0100 as excerpted: > There are no btrfs changes between kernels 4.8.10 and 4.8.11. There is > no compress mount option in my case, that is the only thing I currently > can think of that could make your Set shared number non-zero. Compression...

Re: system hangs due to qgroups

Marc Joliet posted on Sun, 04 Dec 2016 20:20:51 +0100 as excerpted: > On Sunday 04 December 2016 18:24:08 Duncan wrote: >> Marc Joliet posted on Sun, 04 Dec 2016 17:02:48 +0100 as excerpted: >> > [After trying it] >> > >> > Well, crap, I was able to get images of the file system (one >> >

btrfs repair and zero-log doesn't seem to do anything

Hi, I've got a Netgear NAS with an encrypted 4 disk RAID5 setup. One of the hard drives was emailing me about errors so I swapped it out before it died. While syncing another disk died. So I've cloned the disk I replaced before it died and managed to get the array running again. You can read more

Re: system hangs due to qgroups

At 12/04/2016 02:40 AM, Marc Joliet wrote: Hello all, I'm having some trouble with btrfs on a laptop, possibly due to qgroups. Specifically, some file system activities (e.g., snapshot creation, baloo_file_extractor from KDE Plasma) cause the system to hang for up to about 40 minutes, maybe

Re: btrfs fi du is unreliable

On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 3:17 PM, Henk Slager wrote: > On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 7:30 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: >> Hi, >> >> [chris@f25s ~]$ uname -r >> 4.8.11-300.fc25.x86_64 >> [chris@f25s ~]$ rpm -q btrfs-progs >> btrfs-progs-4.8.5-1.fc26.x86_64 >> >> >>

Re: bio linked list corruption.

On 23 November 2016 at 20:58, Dave Jones wrote: > On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 02:34:19PM -0500, Dave Jones wrote: > > > [ 317.689216] BUG: Bad page state in process kworker/u8:8 pfn:4d8fd4 > > trace from just before this happened. Does this shed any light ? > > > >

Re: btrfs fi du is unreliable

On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 7:30 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > Hi, > > [chris@f25s ~]$ uname -r > 4.8.11-300.fc25.x86_64 > [chris@f25s ~]$ rpm -q btrfs-progs > btrfs-progs-4.8.5-1.fc26.x86_64 > > > I'm not finding any pattern to this so far, but it's definitely not > always

crc32c_le performance hit

4.8.11-300.fc25.x86_64 I'm currently doing a btrfs send/receive and I'm seeing a rather large hit for crc32c, bigger than aes-ni (the volume is on dm crypt), using perf top. 14.03% btrfs[.] __crc32c_le 10.50% [kernel] [k]

Re: btrfs fi du is unreliable

Another example: [chris@f25s ~]$ sudo btrfs fi du -s /mnt/first/everything-new Total Exclusive Set shared Filename 367.54GiB14.21GiB 350.95GiB /mnt/first/everything-new The problem here is that Exclusive + Shared ≠ Total. Rather those two add up to 365.16GiB, which suggests

Re: [PATCH 1/1] btrfs: fix improper return value

On Sun, Dec 04, 2016 at 12:51:53PM +0800, Pan Bian wrote: > In function btrfs_uuid_tree_iterate(), errno is assigned to variable ret > on errors. However, it directly returns 0. It may be better to return > ret. This patch also removes the warning, because the caller already > prints a warning. >

Re: system hangs due to qgroups

On Sunday 04 December 2016 18:24:08 Duncan wrote: > Marc Joliet posted on Sun, 04 Dec 2016 17:02:48 +0100 as excerpted: > > That's a good idea, although I'll probably start with sysrescuecd (Linux > > 4.8.5 and btrfs-progs 4.7.3), as I already have experience with it. > > > > [After trying it] >

btrfs restore differs from normal copy

Hi all, I noticed that a monthly differential snapshot creation ended with an error although the created snapshot itself seemed OK. To test en be more confident, I also transferred the diff between the 2016-12-01 en 2016-12-02 and that went without an error from send or receive. The send runs on

Re: system hangs due to qgroups

On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 9:02 AM, Marc Joliet wrote: > > Also, now the file system fails with the BUG I mentioned, see here: > > [Sun Dec 4 12:27:07 2016] BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at > fe10 > [Sun Dec 4 12:27:07 2016] IP: [] >

btrfs fi du is unreliable

Hi, [chris@f25s ~]$ uname -r 4.8.11-300.fc25.x86_64 [chris@f25s ~]$ rpm -q btrfs-progs btrfs-progs-4.8.5-1.fc26.x86_64 I'm not finding any pattern to this so far, but it's definitely not always reliable. Here is today's example. [chris@f25s ~]$ sudo btrfs fi du -s /mnt/second/jackson.2015/

Re: system hangs due to qgroups

Marc Joliet posted on Sun, 04 Dec 2016 17:02:48 +0100 as excerpted: > That's a good idea, although I'll probably start with sysrescuecd (Linux > 4.8.5 and btrfs-progs 4.7.3), as I already have experience with it. > > [After trying it] > > Well, crap, I was able to get images of the file system

Re: [CORRUPTION FILESYSTEM] Corrupted and unrecoverable file system during the snapshot receive

> I haven't seen this with 4.7.10. I suggest running 'btrfs check' > (without repair) using a recent btrfs-progs. You can find 4.8.3 in > koji, just download the appropriate rpm, and 'dnf update *rpm' > > As for kernel, Fedora 23 has 4.8.8 in updates (stable) and 4.8.10 is > in updates-testing, I

Re: system hangs due to qgroups

On Sunday 04 December 2016 03:10:19 Adam Borowski wrote: > On Sat, Dec 03, 2016 at 10:46:40PM +0100, Marc Joliet wrote: > > As it's a rescue shell, I have only the one shell AFAIK, and it's occupied > > by mount. So I can't tell if there are dmesg entries, however, when this > > happens during a

Re: system hangs due to qgroups

OK, so I tried a few things, to now avail, more below. On Saturday 03 December 2016 15:56:45 Chris Murphy wrote: > On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 2:46 PM, Marc Joliet wrote: > > On Saturday 03 December 2016 13:42:42 Chris Murphy wrote: > >> On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Marc Joliet