Hi David,
Any comment on this patchset?
This offline scrub is quite useful and will be core of the incoming
xfstests test cases for RAID56 scrub.
Thanks,
Qu
At 10/28/2016 10:31 AM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
For any one who wants to try it, it can be get from my repo:
https://github.com/adam900710/bt
At 11/22/2016 02:48 AM, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
Hi Qu,
I tested this succefully for RAID5 when doing a scrub (i.e.: I mount a corrupted disks,
then I ran "btrfs scrub start ...", then I check the disks).
However if I do a "cat mnt/out.txt" (out.txt is the corrupted file):
1) the system de
Hi Qu,
I tested this succefully for RAID5 when doing a scrub (i.e.: I mount a
corrupted disks, then I ran "btrfs scrub start ...", then I check the disks).
However if I do a "cat mnt/out.txt" (out.txt is the corrupted file):
1) the system detect that the file is corrupted (good :) )
2) the sys
On 11/08/2016 04:30 AM, Wang Xiaoguang wrote:
The current limit of number of asynchronous delalloc pages is (10 * SZ_1M).
For 4K page, the total ram bytes would be 40G, very big value, I think in
most cases, this limit will not work, here I set limit of the number of
asynchronous delalloc pages t
On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 05:30:58PM +0800, Wang Xiaoguang wrote:
> The current limit of number of asynchronous delalloc pages is (10 * SZ_1M).
> For 4K page, the total ram bytes would be 40G, very big value, I think in
> most cases, this limit will not work, here I set limit of the number of
> async
On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 09:08:14PM -0500, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
> >> - */
> >> - if (location.type == BTRFS_ROOT_ITEM_KEY &&
> >> - location.objectid == root->root_key.objectid) {
> >> - over = 0;
> >> -
In the following situation, scrub will calculate wrong parity to
overwrite correct one:
RAID5 full stripe:
Before
| Dev 1 | Dev 2 | Dev 3 |
| Data stripe 1 | Data stripe 2 | Parity Stripe |
--- 0
| 0x (Bad) | 0x
