Re: [PATCH 6/6] fstests: btrfs: test RAID5 device reappear and balance

On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 10:32:10PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: > The test does the following: > Initialize a RAID5 with some data > > Re-mount RAID5 degraded with _dev3_ missing and write data. > Save md5sum checkpoint1 > > Re-mount healthy RAID5 > > Let balance fix degraded blocks. > Save md5sum

Re: [PATCH 5/6] fstests: btrfs: test RAID1 device reappear and balanced

On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 10:32:09PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: > The test does the following: > Initialize a RAID1 with some data > > Re-mount RAID1 degraded with _dev1_ and write up to > half of the FS capacity > Save md5sum checkpoint1 > > Re-mount healthy RAID1 > > Let balance

Re: [PATCH 4/6] fstests: btrfs: add helper function to check if btrfs is module

On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 10:32:08PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: > We need btrfs to be a module so that it can unloaded and reloaded, > so that we can clean up the btrfs internal in memory device list. It looks like a bug to me if btrfs needs to reload module to clean up the device list. If a user

Re: [PATCH 2/6] fstests: btrfs: add functions to get and put a device for replace target

On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 10:32:06PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: > For the replace tests we need a device as a spare device, > here functions _spare_dev_get() and _spare_dev_put() > will get it from the SCRATCH_DEV_POOL_SAVED, which is set > when _scratch_dev_pool_get() is called, and is based on how >

Re: [PATCH 1/6] fstests: btrfs: add functions to set and reset required number of SCRATCH_DEV_POOL

On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 10:32:05PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: > This patch provides functions > _scratch_dev_pool_get() > _scratch_dev_pool_put() > > Which will help to set/reset SCRATCH_DEV_POOL with the required > number of devices. SCRATCH_DEV_POOL_SAVED will hold all the devices. > > Usage:

Re: Files seen by some apps and not others

Bearcat Şándor posted on Sat, 11 Jun 2016 13:54:44 -0600 as excerpted: > I'm about to try a btrfs restore to see what it can do for me. Any > pointers or help here? I don't want to fsck things up further. FWIW, btrfs restore doesn't write anything at all to the filesystem it's restoring from --

"parent transid verify failed"

Hi I am getting some "parent transid verify failed"-errors. Is there any way to find out what's affected? Are these errors in metadata, data or both - and if they are errors in the data: How can I find out which files are affected? Regards, Tobias -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line

Placing swap partition on a loop device hangs the system

Hi, It's well-known that btrfs doesn't directly support swap files. However, a common workaround I read is to make a loop device from a file on the btrfs file system, and then put a swap partition on the loop device. See for example:

Files seen by some apps and not others

Hello folks, I was getting jaguarundi kernel: BTRFS (device sdb1): bad tree block start 18404062518368034137 2697991438336 and csum failed .. no csum. found for inode .. messages. Following instructions online, i've tried a scrub which aborts before 200mb, a mount -o recovery rw, and a btrfs

Re: Kernel crash on mount after SMR disk trouble

11.6.2016, 19.30, Chris Murphy kirjoitti: On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 6:40 AM, Jukka Larja wrote: 11.6.2016, 15.30, Chris Murphy kirjoitti: On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 9:11 PM, Jukka Larja wrote: I understand that usebackuproot requires kernel

Re: [PATCH v2] fstests: btrfs: add test for qgroup handle extent de-reference

On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 02:40:11PM +0800, Lu Fengqi wrote: > Test if qgroup can handle extent de-reference during reallocation. > "extent de-reference" means that reducing an extent's reference count > or freeing an extent. > Although current qgroup can handle it, we still need to prevent any >

Re: Kernel crash on mount after SMR disk trouble

On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 6:40 AM, Jukka Larja wrote: > 11.6.2016, 15.30, Chris Murphy kirjoitti: > >> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 9:11 PM, Jukka Larja >> wrote: >> >>> I understand that usebackuproot requires kernel >= 4.6. I probably won't >>> be

[PATCH 1/1] btrfs: Use correct format specifier

Component mirror_num of struct btrfsic_block is defined as unsigned int. Use %u as format specifier. Signed-off-by: Heinrich Schuchardt --- fs/btrfs/check-integrity.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/check-integrity.c

Re: btrfs filesystem keeps allocating new chunks for no apparent reason

On 06/10/2016 07:07 PM, Henk Slager wrote: On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 5:41 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote: Hans van Kranenburg posted on Thu, 09 Jun 2016 01:10:46 +0200 as excerpted: The next question is what files these extents belong to. To find out, I need to open up the extent items

Re: [PATCH 2/2] btrfs: prefix fsid to all trace events

On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 07:48:01PM -0400, je...@suse.com wrote: > From: Jeff Mahoney > > When using trace events to debug a problem, it's impossible to determine > which file system generated a particular event. This patch adds a > macro to prefix standard information to the

Re: Replacing drives with larger ones in a 4 drive raid1

Updates: > So for this first replacement I mounted the volume degraded and ran "btrfs > device delete missing /mnt", and that's where it's been stuck for the past > ~23 hours. Only later did I figure out that this command will trigger a > rebalance, and of course that will take a long time.

Re: Kernel crash on mount after SMR disk trouble

11.6.2016, 15.30, Chris Murphy kirjoitti: On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 9:11 PM, Jukka Larja wrote: I understand that usebackuproot requires kernel >= 4.6. I probably won't be installing a custom kernel, but if I still have the array in its current state when 4.6 becomes

Re: Kernel crash on mount after SMR disk trouble

On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 9:11 PM, Jukka Larja wrote: > I understand that usebackuproot requires kernel >= 4.6. I probably won't be > installing a custom kernel, but if I still have the array in its current > state when 4.6 becomes available in Debian Stretch, I'll give