Re: btrfs fi du -s gives Inappropriate ioctl for device
On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 10:59:33PM +0200, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote: > Patches will follow shortly With your patches applied: ~ # btrfs fi du -s /mnt/red/\@backup/ /mnt/red/\@backup/.snapshot/monthly_2017-08-01_05\:30\:01/ /mnt/red/\@svn/ /mnt/red/\@svn/.snapshot/weekly_2017-08-05_04\:20\:02/ Total Exclusive Set shared Filename 1.86TiB75.73MiB 312.77GiB /mnt/red/@backup/ 320.29GiB 0.00B 312.19GiB /mnt/red/@backup/.snapshot/monthly_2017-08-01_05:30:01/ 52.24GiB10.19MiB 4.13GiB /mnt/red/@svn/ 4.35GiB 1.05MiB 4.12GiB /mnt/red/@svn/.snapshot/weekly_2017-08-05_04:20:02/ Best regards, Piotr Szymaniak. -- Mysle, ze gdyby diabel nie istnial i mialby go stworzyc czlowiek, to stworzylby go na swoj obraz i podobienstwo. -- Fiodor Dostojewski signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: btrfs fi du -s gives Inappropriate ioctl for device
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 05:40:30PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Piotr Szymaniak <szar...@grubelek.pl> wrote: > > > > > and... some issues: > > ~ # btrfs fi du -s /mnt/red/\@backup/ > > Total Exclusive Set shared Filename > > ERROR: cannot check space of '/mnt/red/@backup/': Inappropriate ioctl for > > device > > > It's a bug, but I don't know if any devs are working on a fix yet. > > The problem is that the subvolume being snapshot, contains subvolumes. > The resulting snapshot, contains an empty directory in place of the > nested subvolume(s), and that is the cause for the error. Ok, but why, on the same btrfs, it works on some subvols with subvols and does not work on other subvols with subvols? If it does not work - OK, if it works - OK, but that seems a bit... random? ~ # btrfs fi du -s /mnt/red/\@backup/ /mnt/red/\@backup/.snapshot/monthly_2017-08-01_05\:30\:01/ /mnt/red/\@svn/ /mnt/red/\@svn/.snapshot/weekly_2017-08-05_04\:20\:02/ Total Exclusive Set shared Filename ERROR: cannot check space of '/mnt/red/@backup/': Inappropriate ioctl for device ERROR: cannot check space of '/mnt/red/@backup/.snapshot/monthly_2017-08-01_05:30:01/': Inappropriate ioctl for device 52.23GiB10.57MiB 4.13GiB /mnt/red/@svn/ 4.35GiB 1.03MiB 4.12GiB /mnt/red/@svn/.snapshot/weekly_2017-08-05_04:20:02/ Best regards, Piotr Szymaniak. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
btrfs fi du -s gives Inappropriate ioctl for device
Hi list, I have some weird issue. So, I have btrfs fs and some subvols, like that: ~ # btrfs sub list /mnt/red/ ID 260 gen 827956 top level 5 path @home ID 261 gen 827926 top level 5 path @backup ID 645 gen 827911 top level 5 path @svn *snip* and some snapshots on those subvols: *snip* ID 2501 gen 827894 top level 260 path @home/.snapshot/monthly_2017-05-01_05:30:01 ID 2603 gen 827894 top level 260 path @home/.snapshot/monthly_2017-06-01_05:30:01 ID 2604 gen 827927 top level 261 path @backup/.snapshot/monthly_2017-06-01_05:30:02 ID 2680 gen 827895 top level 260 path @home/.snapshot/monthly_2017-07-01_05:30:01 ID 2681 gen 827927 top level 261 path @backup/.snapshot/monthly_2017-07-01_05:30:01 ID 2734 gen 827895 top level 260 path @home/.snapshot/weekly_2017-07-22_04:20:01 ID 2735 gen 827905 top level 645 path @svn/.snapshot/weekly_2017-07-22_04:20:02 ID 2754 gen 827895 top level 260 path @home/.snapshot/weekly_2017-07-29_04:20:01 ID 2755 gen 827906 top level 645 path @svn/.snapshot/weekly_2017-07-29_04:20:01 ID 2763 gen 827896 top level 260 path @home/.snapshot/monthly_2017-08-01_05:30:01 *snip* and... some issues: ~ # btrfs fi du -s /mnt/red/\@backup/ Total Exclusive Set shared Filename ERROR: cannot check space of '/mnt/red/@backup/': Inappropriate ioctl for device and it works for other subvols: ~ # btrfs fi du -s /mnt/red/\@svn/ Total Exclusive Set shared Filename 52.22GiB10.59MiB 4.13GiB /mnt/red/@svn/ ~ # btrfs fi du -s /mnt/red/\@home/ Total Exclusive Set shared Filename 2.08TiB 4.54GiB 124.51GiB /mnt/red/@home/ on the other hand, those values also look wrong (2.08TiB?): ~ # btrfs fi df /mnt/red/\@home/ Data, RAID1: total=448.00GiB, used=447.39GiB System, RAID1: total=32.00MiB, used=80.00KiB Metadata, RAID1: total=3.00GiB, used=2.02GiB GlobalReserve, single: total=512.00MiB, used=0.00B ~ # btrfs fi usage /mnt/red/\@home/ Overall: Device size: 1.36TiB Device allocated:902.06GiB Device unallocated: 493.21GiB Device missing: 0.00B Used:898.81GiB Free (estimated):247.22GiB (min: 247.22GiB) Data ratio: 2.00 Metadata ratio: 2.00 Global reserve: 512.00MiB (used: 0.00B) Data,RAID1: Size:448.00GiB, Used:447.39GiB /dev/mapper/wd0 448.00GiB /dev/mapper/wd1 448.00GiB Metadata,RAID1: Size:3.00GiB, Used:2.02GiB /dev/mapper/wd0 3.00GiB /dev/mapper/wd1 3.00GiB System,RAID1: Size:32.00MiB, Used:80.00KiB /dev/mapper/wd032.00MiB /dev/mapper/wd132.00MiB Unallocated: /dev/mapper/wd0 246.60GiB /dev/mapper/wd1 246.60GiB ~ # uname -sr Linux 4.4.76 ~ # btrfs --version btrfs-progs v4.12 Whats wrong with one of my subvols? Whats wrong with space reported by fi du? Best regards, Piotr Szymaniak. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: btrfs balance {,meta}data to raid5 not working?
On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 02:14:44AM +, Duncan wrote: But you could try the latest 4.0-rc7+ kernel and see if it works with that, yet. Will try that. 2b) If instead your intention was to convert it to raid5 before upgrading it to three devices, just add the third device first, then do the balance- conversion. It'll save quite some time over effectively doing the balance-conversion twice. I want to grow it later to 3 or 4 devices. Now it is still a test setup and I want to try convert to raid5 and also check +- time it takes (and if it will end OK). Piotr Szymaniak. -- - Zamówiłeś baby-sitterkę? - chciała wiedzieć Maggie. -- Graham Masterton, Zaklęci (przełożył Juliusz Garztecki) signature.asc Description: Digital signature
btrfs balance {,meta}data to raid5 not working?
Hi, I tried today to balance two drive btrfs raid1 to two drive btrfs raid5 without luck: ~ # btrfs balance start -dconvert=raid5 -mconvert=raid5 /mnt/cdrom/ ERROR: error during balancing '/mnt/cdrom/' - Invalid argument There may be more info in syslog - try dmesg | tail ~ # btrfs balance start -mconvert=raid5 /mnt/cdrom/ ERROR: error during balancing '/mnt/cdrom/' - Invalid argument There may be more info in syslog - try dmesg | tail ~ # btrfs balance start -dconvert=raid5 /mnt/cdrom/ ERROR: error during balancing '/mnt/cdrom/' - Invalid argument There may be more info in syslog - try dmesg | tail ~ # dmesg | tail -3 [57073.050249] BTRFS error (device sdd): unable to start balance with target data profile 128 [57079.674386] BTRFS error (device sdd): unable to start balance with target metadata profile 128 [57082.754136] BTRFS error (device sdd): unable to start balance with target data profile 128 Linux 3.19.3 btrfs-progs v3.19.1 Piotr Szymaniak. -- Nie wierze, zeby wyslali cie tam, nie w tym kraju, gdzie zabojcom daje sie po lapie i po dwoch latach ogladania kolorowej telewizji w wiezie- niu znow wypuszcza na ulice, zeby mogli zabijac. -- Stephen King, Apt Pupil signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: snapshot space use
On Thu, Apr 09, 2015 at 08:45:21AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: *snip* NOTE: quota is not so stable and has some problem, but should give you enough info. Those are related to actually using quota or can also hit you when you want to use it just for things like this snapshot space use? Piotr Szymaniak. -- - Oo, jesteś bystrzejszy, niż się wydaje. Przechodziłeś jakieś szkolenie antyterrorystyczne? - W pewnym sensie tak. Byłem żonaty. -- Nelson DeMille, The Lion's Game signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Using two mirrored drives separately
On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 07:11:52PM +0300, Leonid Bloch wrote: I am wondering: if I set up btrfs on two identical drives, with data and metadata mirroring, will it be possible to use these drives separately later on? Will just one of these drives work as a regular btrfs-formatted single drive if connected to a different machine? If by this you mean btrfs raid1, then yes, they will work this way. Just both of them will have missing device and, afaik, wont mount without -o degraded. But then you can rebalance to notraid1 or add another disk and replace missing devices on new machines. Piotr Szymaniak. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Can btrfs re-sync an out-of-sync RAID1 filesystem?
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 10:13:01AM -0700, Alan Hagge wrote: I know that sounds weird, but here's my scenario: There was similar thread [1] few days ago, you should take a look at it. [1] https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org/msg37144.html Piotr Szymaniak. -- I ten smród. Diabli wiedzą, co tam gniło, w tym mięsiwie, ale Redowi wydało się, że sto tysięcy rozbitych cuchnących jaj wylanych na sto tysięcy cuchnących rybich łbów i zdechłych kotów nie może śmierdzieć tak, jak śmierdziała ta maź. -- Arkadij i Borys Strugaccy, „Piknik na skraju drogi” signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: ENOSPC errors during balance
On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 11:38:08AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: [96241.882138] ata2.00: exception Emask 0x1 SAct 0x7ffe0fff SErr 0x0 action 0x6 frozen [96241.882139] ata2.00: Ata error. fis:0x21 [96241.882142] ata2.00: failed command: READ FPDMA QUEUED [96241.882148] ata2.00: cmd 60/08:00:68:0a:2d/00:00:18:00:00/40 tag 0 ncq 4096 in res 41/00:58:40:5c:2c/00:00:18:00:00/40 Emask 0x1 (device error) Afair those are somehow related to NCQ. Piotr Szymaniak. -- Komnata audiencyjna zlotego Bruna przerastala wszystko, co dotad widzialem. Musial zatrudnic dziesiatki programistow i kreatorow, by stworzyc tak wyuzdane i wysmakowane wnetrze. Dzwieki, barwy, ksztalty i zapachy wywolywaly erekcje. -- Marcin Przybylek, Gamedec: Syndrom Adelheima signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [PATCH] btrfs file write debugging patch
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 02:20:22PM -0600, Mitch Harder wrote: As promised, I'm put together a modified file.c with many trace_printk debugging statements to augment the ftrace. *snip* Just my few cents. I've applied the patch from Chris Mason (Sun, 27 Feb 2011 20:46:05 -0500) and this one from Mitch (Mon, 28 Feb 2011 14:20:22 -0600) on top of vanilla 2.6.38-rc6 and it seems that it resolves my issues with hanging `svn info' during libgcrypt emerge. Piotr Szymaniak. -- - (...) Nie wyobrazam sobie, co ta gora miesa moglaby ci dac, czego ja nie moglbym ofiarowac. Oczywiscie poza piecdziesiecioma funtami rozrosnietych miesni. - Moze mnie wlasnie pociagaja rozrosniete miesnie. (...) W koncu wielu mezczyzn pociaga rozrosnieta tkanka tluszczowa piersi. -- Graham Masterton, The Wells of Hell pgp0s4aN9vbmU.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [PATCH v2]Btrfs: pwrite blocked when writing from the mmaped buffer of the same page
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 09:51:11AM +0800, Zhong, Xin wrote:
The backtrace in your attachment looks like a known bug of 2.6.37 which have
already been fixed in 2.6.38. I have no idea why latest btrfs still hang in
your environment if there's no debug info...
Hi list.
I'm watching this list for a while because it seems, that I'm also
affected by this bug. In the archives I found someone with Gentoo system
with freezing `svn info' (thats why I joined). Well, seems that I have
same issue here.
Attached latest _rc kernel sysrq+t output (first part when the `svn
info' freezed on libgcrypt, and second after ctrl+c that emerge).
Seems that my backtrace is small compared to Marias. I'm missing some
features in kernel to get larger backtraces?
Piotr Szymaniak.
-Original Message-
From: Maria Wikström [mailto:ma...@ponstudios.se]
Sent: Friday, February 18, 2011 7:32 PM
To: Zhong, Xin
Cc: Johannes Hirte; linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2]Btrfs: pwrite blocked when writing from the mmaped
buffer of the same page
Seems like my reply got eaten by the lists spam filter, so I resend with
attachment compressed. Should have thought of that :p
fre 2011-02-11 klockan 12:39 +0800 skrev Zhong, Xin:
Hi,
Could you paste the output of sysrq+t here? Thanks!
Yes, it's in the attachment. I tried latest btrfs from git (last commit Mon
Feb 14 00:45:29 2011 +) but it hang so bad that I couldn't get the output
from sysrq+t to hit the disk. So the output is from vanilla
2.6.37
// Maria
-Original Message-
From: Johannes Hirte [mailto:johannes.hi...@fem.tu-ilmenau.de]
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 7:35 AM
To: Zhong, Xin
Cc: Maria Wikström; linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2]Btrfs: pwrite blocked when writing from the
mmaped buffer of the same page
On Friday 28 January 2011 04:53:24 Zhong, Xin wrote:
Could you describe the steps to recreate it?
It will be a great help for me to look further. Thanks!
It's a little strange. I have to systems with btrfs, both
Gentoo-based. One is affected by this bug the other is not. On the
affected system it is enough to do a 'emerge dev-libs/libgcrypt' that
should normaly compile and install libgcrypt. The emerge command is
part of portage, the package management of Gentoo.
The strace output looks similar to the one from Maria:
N?r??yb?X??ǧv?^?){.n?+{?n?߲)w* jg??? ?ݢj/???z?ޖ??2?ޙ?)ߡ?a???? ?G???h??j:+v???w??٥
--
Druzyna futbolowa tutaj jest do niczego, ale ucze sie troche pilki
noznej. Trener mowi, ze pilka nozna to futbol dla inteligentnych, a
futbol to futbol dla kretynow.
-- Stephen King, The Dead Zone
vanilla-2.6.38-rc6_sysrq-t.bz2
Description: BZip2 compressed data
pgpwOlW7jCAZg.pgp
Description: PGP signature
