On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 10:53:04PM -0400, Austin S Hemmelgarn wrote:
But, for right now I'd prefer the admin get involved in using the backup
supers. I think silently using the backups is going to lead to
surprises.
Maybe there could be a mount non-default mount-option to use backup
Original Message
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] btrfs: Use backup superblocks if and only if
the first superblock is valid but corrupted.
From: Austin S Hemmelgarn ahferro...@gmail.com
To: Chris Mason c...@fb.com, Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com,
linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
On 07/27/2014 08:29 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Original Message
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] btrfs: Use backup superblocks if and only if
the first superblock is valid but corrupted.
From: Austin S Hemmelgarn ahferro...@gmail.com
To: Chris Mason c...@fb.com, Qu Wenruo
On 07/24/2014 05:28 PM, Chris Mason wrote:
On 06/26/2014 11:53 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Current btrfs will only use the first superblock, making the backup
superblocks only useful for 'btrfs rescue super' command.
The old problem is that if we use backup superblocks when the first
superblock
On 06/26/2014 11:53 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Current btrfs will only use the first superblock, making the backup
superblocks only useful for 'btrfs rescue super' command.
The old problem is that if we use backup superblocks when the first
superblock is not valid, we will be able to mount a
Current btrfs will only use the first superblock, making the backup
superblocks only useful for 'btrfs rescue super' command.
The old problem is that if we use backup superblocks when the first
superblock is not valid, we will be able to mount a none btrfs
filesystem, which used to contains btrfs
