Re: Warning and BUG using btrfs-vol -b
By the way, i think it'd be useful if debug-tree would tell which policy
the fs is applying to each chunk. Something like this:
item 4 key (FIRST_CHUNK_TREE CHUNK_ITEM 8379826176) itemoff 3495
itemsize 112
chunk length 319881216 owner 2 type 17 (data on RAID1)
num_stripes 2
stripe 0 devid 2 offset 2265382912
stripe 1 devid 1 offset 989003776
Index: btrfs-progs-unstable/print-tree.c
===
--- btrfs-progs-unstable.orig/print-tree.c 2009-10-07 16:44:53.013210615
+0200
+++ btrfs-progs-unstable/print-tree.c 2009-10-07 21:37:46.162546261 +0200
@@ -79,15 +79,37 @@
return 0;
}
+static void print_chunk_type(u64 chunk_flags)
+{
+ printf(" type %llu (", chunk_flags);
+
+ if (chunk_flags & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DATA)
+ printf("data");
+ if (chunk_flags & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_METADATA)
+ printf("metadata");
+ if (chunk_flags & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_SYSTEM)
+ printf("system??");
+ if (chunk_flags & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DUP)
+ printf("dup??");
+ if (chunk_flags & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID0)
+ printf(" on RAID0");
+ if (chunk_flags & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID1)
+ printf(" on RAID1");
+ if (chunk_flags & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID10)
+ printf(" on RAID10");
+ printf(") ");
+}
+
static void print_chunk(struct extent_buffer *eb, struct btrfs_chunk *chunk)
{
int num_stripes = btrfs_chunk_num_stripes(eb, chunk);
int i;
- printf("\t\tchunk length %llu owner %llu type %llu num_stripes %d\n",
+ printf("\t\tchunk length %llu owner %llu",
(unsigned long long)btrfs_chunk_length(eb, chunk),
- (unsigned long long)btrfs_chunk_owner(eb, chunk),
- (unsigned long long)btrfs_chunk_type(eb, chunk),
- num_stripes);
+ (unsigned long long)btrfs_chunk_owner(eb, chunk));
+ print_chunk_type((unsigned long long)btrfs_chunk_type(eb, chunk));
+ printf("num_stripes %d\n", num_stripes);
+
for (i = 0 ; i < num_stripes ; i++) {
printf("\t\t\tstripe %d devid %llu offset %llu\n", i,
(unsigned long long)btrfs_stripe_devid_nr(eb, chunk, i),
--
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
Re: Warning and BUG using btrfs-vol -b
On Wednesday 07 October 2009 21:45:29 Chris Mason escribió: > I'm afraid this is good old enospc. Balancing still needs some work to > be completely safe. I've tried using less data and raid1, but I can't reproduce it. -- 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
Re: Warning and BUG using btrfs-vol -b
On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 09:10:28PM +0200, Diego Calleja wrote: > On Wednesday 07 October 2009 16:33:09 Chris Mason escribió: > > Ok, in this case you ended up with raid0 on the data. If you: > > > > mkfs.btrfs -d raid1 /dev/loop0 /dev/loop1 you'll get data raid1. > > I got a BUG...but it may be a different bug. Unlike the last time, > I didn't even need to zero one of the "disks", the second I > rebalanced it oopsed: I'm afraid this is good old enospc. Balancing still needs some work to be completely safe. -chris -- 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
Re: Warning and BUG using btrfs-vol -b
On Wednesday 07 October 2009 16:33:09 Chris Mason escribió: > Ok, in this case you ended up with raid0 on the data. If you: > > mkfs.btrfs -d raid1 /dev/loop0 /dev/loop1 you'll get data raid1. I got a BUG...but it may be a different bug. Unlike the last time, I didn't even need to zero one of the "disks", the second I rebalanced it oopsed: [ 705.060358] btrfs: relocating block group 4194304 flags 4 [ 1006.106133] btrfs: relocating block group 570428 flags 18 [ 1006.336521] btrfs: found 1 extents [ 1006.469967] btrfs: relocating block group 5384896512 flags 20 [ 1006.471043] btrfs allocation failed flags 20, wanted 4096 [ 1006.471048] space_info has 317378560 free, is full [ 1006.471052] space_info total=319881216, pinned=16384, delalloc=0, may_use=0, used=2355200, root=2875392, super=131072, reserved=0 [ 1006.471058] block group 5384896512 has 319881216 bytes, 2355200 used 16384 pinned 0 reserved [ 1006.471063] entry offset 5384896512, bytes 483328, bitmap yes [ 1006.471065] block group has cluster?: yes [ 1006.471067] 1 blocks of free space at or bigger than bytes is [ 1006.471092] [ cut here ] [ 1006.471094] kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/transaction.c:1001! [ 1006.471098] invalid opcode: [#1] PREEMPT SMP [ 1006.471103] last sysfs file: /sys/devices/virtual/block/loop0/range [ 1006.471106] CPU 0 [ 1006.471109] Modules linked in: ppp_deflate bsd_comp ppp_async crc_ccitt btrfs zlib_deflate crc32c libcrc32c loop ppp_generic slhc kvm_intel kvm i915 snd_ca0106 snd_rawmidi drm_kms_helper snd_ac97_codec ac97_bus cfbcopyarea snd_pcm_oss video snd_mixer_oss backlight snd_pcm snd_timer cfbimgblt processor wacom intel_agp cfbfillrect button snd soundcore snd_page_alloc usbhid fan fuse ehci_hcd uhci_hcd thermal thermal_sys atl1 mii usbcore [ 1006.471159] Pid: 8207, comm: btrfs-vol Not tainted 2.6.32-rc3 #1 System Product Name [ 1006.471162] RIP: 0010:[] [] btrfs_commit_transaction+0x6c5/0x6f0 [btrfs] [ 1006.471183] RSP: 0018:8800bc285a78 EFLAGS: 00010286 [ 1006.471186] RAX: ffe4 RBX: 8800bdef5800 RCX: 0016 [ 1006.471189] RDX: RSI: 8800bc2859f8 RDI: 8800a86d8060 [ 1006.471192] RBP: 8800bc285b18 R08: R09: [ 1006.471195] R10: R11: R12: 8800a181f5c0 [ 1006.471199] R13: 8800a1eb1ae0 R14: 8800bc285ab8 R15: 8800a1eb1b50 [ 1006.471202] FS: 7f7c5427f730() GS:88000180() knlGS: [ 1006.471206] CS: 0010 DS: ES: CR0: 8005003b [ 1006.471209] CR2: 02812500 CR3: a2f88000 CR4: 26f0 [ 1006.471212] DR0: DR1: DR2: [ 1006.471215] DR3: DR6: 0ff0 DR7: 0400 [ 1006.471219] Process btrfs-vol (pid: 8207, threadinfo 8800bc284000, task 88000b2bae00) [ 1006.471221] Stack: [ 1006.471223] 8800bc285ad8 0206 0001bf15ad00 0110 [ 1006.471229] <0> 8800a181f5c0 0004 8800a1eb1b80 8800a1eb1ae0 [ 1006.471235] <0> 88000b2bae00 8106eb30 8800bc285ad0 [ 1006.471242] Call Trace: [ 1006.471250] [] ? autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x40 [ 1006.471264] [] ? start_transaction+0x11e/0x170 [btrfs] [ 1006.471285] [] relocate_block_group+0xec/0x4b0 [btrfs] [ 1006.471291] [] ? sub_preempt_count+0x59
Re: Warning and BUG using btrfs-vol -b
On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 03:51:46PM +0200, Diego Calleja wrote: > On Wednesday 07 October 2009 05:17:54 Chris Mason escribió: > > > Thanks, I'll try to reproduce. Which raid level did you use for data? > > If not raid1, could you try with raid1? ;) > > I'm not sure, since the utils won't tell. I mkfs'ed and mounted one of the > 3.5GB > files with no special options, and copied some files on it. I mkfs'ed the > second > file, put it in a loop device, and added it to the pool with btrfs-vol -a. > Then > I run btrfs-vol -b and I copied more files and rebalanced several times. > > Then I zeroed one of the files used as disks, and tried to read the files in > the volume (unsucessfully). Then I rebalanced, and I hit the oops. It seems to > be very reproducible. Ok, in this case you ended up with raid0 on the data. If you: mkfs.btrfs -d raid1 /dev/loop0 /dev/loop1 you'll get data raid1. -chris -- 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
Re: Warning and BUG using btrfs-vol -b
On Wednesday 07 October 2009 05:17:54 Chris Mason escribió: > Thanks, I'll try to reproduce. Which raid level did you use for data? > If not raid1, could you try with raid1? ;) I'm not sure, since the utils won't tell. I mkfs'ed and mounted one of the 3.5GB files with no special options, and copied some files on it. I mkfs'ed the second file, put it in a loop device, and added it to the pool with btrfs-vol -a. Then I run btrfs-vol -b and I copied more files and rebalanced several times. Then I zeroed one of the files used as disks, and tried to read the files in the volume (unsucessfully). Then I rebalanced, and I hit the oops. It seems to be very reproducible. -- 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
Re: Warning and BUG using btrfs-vol -b
On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 08:48:32PM +0200, Diego Calleja wrote: > I was playing with btrfs with 2 files of 3.5 GB (using loop), I completely > zeroed one of the files. As expected, I had checksum failures, and I run > btrfs-vol -b just to see what happened, and I got this (using -rc3): Thanks, I'll try to reproduce. Which raid level did you use for data? If not raid1, could you try with raid1? ;) -chris -- 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
