Paulo Dias posted on Mon, 25 Apr 2016 22:40:59 -0300 as excerpted: > hi/2 all.. > > we are in 4.6 rc5 and im still seeing a LOT of this with my SSD: > > Abr 25 22:38:01 hydra kernel: ------------[ cut here ]------------ > Abr 25 22:38:01 hydra kernel: WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 6236 at > /home/kernel/COD/linux/fs/btrfs/inode.c:9261 > btrfs_destroy_inode+0x247/0x2c0 [btrfs]
I, OTOH, am not seeing any of them here, also SSD, after upgrading to pre-4.6-git shortly after 4.6-rc4. <shrug> But my use-case is apparently less stress on the filesystem than many. Multiple small (largest is 24 GiB usable) btrfs raid1 on a pair of parallel-partitioned ssds, save for /boot, which is tiny (256 MiB) mixed-bg dup mode, with the first backup on the other device and the grub install for each device pointing at its /boot, so I can bios-select the backup when needed. The only serious problems I had were when one of the two ssds was going bad, forcing a replacement, after which I've not had major problems of any sort. Also, as I'm using multiple independent btrfs, including identically sized fallbacks as first backup on the same pair of physical devices, I don't use subvolumes and don't do snapshots. Also, no active quotas and I mount with autodefrag, ssd is automatically detected, and I don't use the discard mount option. So with your ssd showing the problem and mine not, it's not directly ssd related, but if you do snapshotting and/or subvolumes, it could be related to that, or quotas, or trim/discard, or filesystem size. Meanwhile, see the "btrfs_destroy_inode WARN_ON" thread, which interestingly enough, had a followup posted apparently the exact same minute as yours was, to this thread. Based on that, it's not just you, but by that reply anyway, despite seeing lots of the warn-ons and getting scared back to an earlier kernel as a result, no dataloss was observed. So without a pin-down it's tough to say it /can't/ happen, but at least based on the reply there, with the warn-ons apparently happening about every 10 minutes even with light use, no data loss from it to date, so while data loss /might/ still be possible, if it is, thankfully it doesn't seem to actually trigger very often, even under heavy destroy-inode warn-on triggering. So they're obviously aware of the problem and presumably working on it, but it's equally obviously not fixed yet. Were I seeing the problem frequently (again, I've not seen it at all), I'd likely drop back to 4.5 until there's a fix, tho if it takes long enough 4.5 might be going out of support, 4.4-LTS is of course another option. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman -- 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
