On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 06:07:01PM +0530, Lakshmipathi.G wrote:
> >
> > Yes, the owner is the number of the tree.
> >
> > DATA_RELOC_TREE is -9, but then unsigned 64 bits.
> >
> -9 + 2**64
> > 18446744073709551607L
> >
> > So the result is a number that's close to the max or 64 bits.
> >
> >
>
> Yes, the owner is the number of the tree.
>
> DATA_RELOC_TREE is -9, but then unsigned 64 bits.
>
-9 + 2**64
> 18446744073709551607L
>
> So the result is a number that's close to the max or 64 bits.
>
> You can find those numbers in the kernel source in
> include/uapi/linux/btrfs_tree.h
On 01/30/2017 02:54 AM, Lakshmipathi.G wrote:
> After creating raid1:
> $./mkfs.btrfs -f -d raid1 -m raid1 /dev/sda6 /dev/sda7
>
> and using
> $./btrfs inspect-internal dump-tree /dev/sda6 #./btrfs-debug-tree /dev/sda6
>
> shows possible wrong value for 'owner'?
> --
> checksum tree key
Raid1 is irrelevant, looks like this happen with simple case too.
$./mkfs.btrfs tests/test.img
$./btrfs-debug-tree tests/test.img
possible issue with ./btrfs-debug-tree stdout?
On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 7:24 AM, Lakshmipathi.G
wrote:
> After creating raid1:
>
After creating raid1:
$./mkfs.btrfs -f -d raid1 -m raid1 /dev/sda6 /dev/sda7
and using
$./btrfs inspect-internal dump-tree /dev/sda6 #./btrfs-debug-tree /dev/sda6
shows possible wrong value for 'owner'?
--
checksum tree key (CSUM_TREE ROOT_ITEM 0)
leaf 29425664 items 0 free space 16283