On 05/17/2018 11:49 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2018年05月18日 13:23, Steve Leung wrote:
Hi list,

I've got 3-device raid1 btrfs filesystem that's throwing up some
"corrupt leaf" errors in dmesg.  This is a uniquified list I've
observed lately:

Evidently I forgot that I added a fourth device to this system, from the info below, but I don't think it matters. :)

   BTRFS critical (device sda1): corrupt leaf: root=1 block=4970196795392
slot=307 ino=206231 file_offset=0, invalid ram_bytes for uncompressed
inline extent, have 3468 expect 3469

Would you please use "btrfs-debug-tree -b 4970196795392 /dev/sda1" to
dump the leaf?

Attached btrfs-debug-tree dumps for all of the blocks that I saw messages for.

It's caught by tree-checker code which is ensuring all tree blocks are
correct before btrfs can take use of them.

That inline extent size check is tested, so I'm wondering if this
indicates any real corruption.
That btrfs-debug-tree output will definitely help.

BTW, if I didn't miss anything, there should not be any inlined extent
in root tree.

   BTRFS critical (device sda1): corrupt leaf: root=1 block=4970552426496
slot=91 ino=209736 file_offset=0, invalid ram_bytes for uncompressed
inline extent, have 3496 expect 3497

Same dump will definitely help.

   BTRFS critical (device sda1): corrupt leaf: root=1 block=4970712399872
slot=221 ino=205230 file_offset=0, invalid ram_bytes for uncompressed
inline extent, have 1790 expect 1791
   BTRFS critical (device sda1): corrupt leaf: root=1 block=4970803920896
slot=368 ino=205732 file_offset=0, invalid ram_bytes for uncompressed
inline extent, have 2475 expect 2476
   BTRFS critical (device sda1): corrupt leaf: root=1 block=4970987945984
slot=236 ino=208896 file_offset=0, invalid ram_bytes for uncompressed
inline extent, have 490 expect 491

All of them seem to be 1 short of the expected value.

Some files do seem to be inaccessible on the filesystem, and btrfs
inspect-internal on any of those inode numbers fails with:

  ERROR: ino paths ioctl: Input/output error

and another message for that inode appears.

'btrfs check' (output attached) seems to notice these corruptions (among
a few others, some of which seem to be related to a problematic attempt
to build Android I posted about some months ago).

Other information:

Arch Linux x86-64, kernel 4.16.6, btrfs-progs 4.16.  The filesystem has
about 25 snapshots at the moment, only a handful of compressed files,
and nothing fancy like qgroups enabled.

btrfs fi show:

  Label: none  uuid: 9d4db9e3-b9c3-4f6d-8cb4-60ff55e96d82
          Total devices 4 FS bytes used 2.48TiB
          devid    1 size 1.36TiB used 1.13TiB path /dev/sdd1
          devid    2 size 464.73GiB used 230.00GiB path /dev/sdc1
          devid    3 size 1.36TiB used 1.13TiB path /dev/sdb1
          devid    4 size 3.49TiB used 2.49TiB path /dev/sda1

btrfs fi df:

  Data, RAID1: total=2.49TiB, used=2.48TiB
  System, RAID1: total=32.00MiB, used=416.00KiB
  Metadata, RAID1: total=7.00GiB, used=5.29GiB
  GlobalReserve, single: total=512.00MiB, used=0.00B

dmesg output attached as well.

Thanks in advance for any assistance!  I have backups of all the
important stuff here but it would be nice to fix the corruptions in place.

And btrfs check doesn't report the same problem as the default original
mode doesn't have such check.

Please also post the result of "btrfs check --mode=lowmem /dev/sda1"

Also, attached. It seems to notice the same off-by-one problems, though there also seem to be a couple of examples of being off by more than one.

Thanks for looking at this!  I'll get my backups ready, just in case.

Steve

Attachment: btrfs-check-lowmem.txt.gz
Description: application/gzip

Attachment: btrfs-debug-tree-4970196795392.txt.gz
Description: application/gzip

Attachment: btrfs-debug-tree-4970552426496.txt.gz
Description: application/gzip

Attachment: btrfs-debug-tree-4970712399872.txt.gz
Description: application/gzip

Attachment: btrfs-debug-tree-4970803920896.txt.gz
Description: application/gzip

Attachment: btrfs-debug-tree-4970987945984.txt.gz
Description: application/gzip

Reply via email to