From: Liu Bo <liubo2009@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: Maik Zumstrull <maik@zumstrull.net>
Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Bug(?): btrfs carries on working if part of a device disappears
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 20:07:18 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F101E76.5070200@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAO=zWD+2D-qH-uLqdta6Yy_L2cE0ggCn7rMDUFz+w-9VMM=pQw@mail.gmail.com>
On 01/06/2012 02:02 AM, Maik Zumstrull wrote:
> Hello list,
>
> I hit a funny BIOS bug the other day where the BIOS suddenly sets a
> HPA on a random hard disk, leaving only the first 33 MB accessible.
> That disk had one device of a multi-device btrfs on it in my case.
> (With dm-crypt/LUKS in between, no partitioning or LVM.)
>
> The reason I'm writing to you is that btrfs apparently didn't care at
> all. It didn't complain, and it certainly didn't consider "Uhm, maybe
> I should stop writing to a file system that mostly doesn't exist
> anymore." The only errors I saw in dmesg were from the lower block
> device level: someone trying to read or write beyond the end of a
> device. An error btrfs apparently didn't mind. It took me a while to
> figure out what had happened, during which time btrfsck and the btrfs
> kernel part worked together to pretty much totally trash the fs. (I'm
> still trying a few things, but I'm not hopeful. Hold the default
> backup rant, I can in fact recover anything that was on this from
> elsewhere, I think.)
>
> So, I think during mount, btrfs should check the reported size of the
> block device, and if it's significantly smaller than fs metadata
> implies it must be, mount degraded or read-only or not at all. And
> mostly, complain. Loudly.
>
I also notice this, when we "mkfs.btrfs" with a "-b fssize", if "fssize" is
larger than dev size, it will not complain and get "beyond the end" errors.
so maybe we limit the mkfs size:
diff --git a/mkfs.c b/mkfs.c
index e3ced19..3ac8525 100644
--- a/mkfs.c
+++ b/mkfs.c
@@ -1282,6 +1282,8 @@ int main(int ac, char **av)
ret = btrfs_prepare_device(fd, file, zero_end, &dev_block_count, &mixed);
if (block_count == 0)
block_count = dev_block_count;
+ if (block_count > dev_block_count);
+ block_count = dev_block_count;
} else {
ac = 0;
file = av[optind++];
thanks,
liubo
> This was on Debian's linux-image-3.1.0-1-amd6 at version 3.1.6-1.
> Other ways this could happen than HPA are LVM or partitioning.
>
>
> Maik
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-13 12:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-05 18:02 Bug(?): btrfs carries on working if part of a device disappears Maik Zumstrull
2012-01-13 12:07 ` Liu Bo [this message]
2012-01-13 12:51 ` Ben Klein
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4F101E76.5070200@cn.fujitsu.com \
--to=liubo2009@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maik@zumstrull.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.