Hi
During writing patches about check, I found something confusing
about btrfs-progs original check.
Setup:
Version: Btrfs progs v4.13.1
$ make TEST=006\* test-fsck
[TEST] fsck-tests.sh
[TEST/fsck] 006-bad-root-items
$ cat tests/fsck-tests-results.txt | tail -n 25
############### .../btrfs-progs/btrfs check test.img
checking extents
ref mismatch on [15474688 905216] extent item 1, found 4
Backref 15474688 parent 30883840 owner 0 offset 0 num_refs 0 not found
in extent tree
Incorrect local backref count on 15474688 parent 30883840 owner 0 offset
0 found 1 wanted 0 back 0x561cdc0b2770
Backref 15474688 parent 31326208 owner 0 offset 0 num_refs 0 not found
in extent tree
Incorrect local backref count on 15474688 parent 31326208 owner 0 offset
0 found 1 wanted 0 back 0x561cdc0b5390
Backref 15474688 parent 31817728 owner 0 offset 0 num_refs 0 not found
in extent tree
Incorrect local backref count on 15474688 parent 31817728 owner 0 offset
0 found 1 wanted 0 back 0x561cdc0b5330
backpointer mismatch on [15474688 905216]
checking free space cache
checking fs roots
checking csums
checking root refs
Checking filesystem on test.img
UUID: 3857c23d-4219-4600-a636-ac7707dc4ff3
cache and super generation don't match, space cache will be invalidated
found 6291456 bytes used, *no error* found
total csum bytes: 660
total tree bytes: 786432
total fs tree bytes: 688128
total extent tree bytes: 16384
btree space waste bytes: 459860
file data blocks allocated: 35536896
referenced 25890816
It seems that errors in extent-tree are not important so btrfs-progs
just returns 0.
Is this behavior normal(on purpose)?
I have written a patch to fix it but then test-fsck/006 will fail due to
nonzero value progs returned.
Thanks,
Su
--
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
