From: Austin S Hemmelgarn <ahferroin7@gmail.com>
To: Chris Murphy <lists@colorremedies.com>,
Btrfs BTRFS <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: BTRFS raid6 unmountable after a couple of days of usage.
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 14:12:06 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55DCAFF6.3020007@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55A79854.6020309@gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1759 bytes --]
On 2015-07-16 07:41, Austin S Hemmelgarn wrote:
> On 2015-07-15 17:29, Chris Murphy wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Hugo Mills <hugo@carfax.org.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> There is at least one superblock on every device, usually two, and
>>> often three. Each superblock contains the virtual address of the roots
>>> of the root tree, the chunk tree and the log tree. Those are useless
>>> without having the chunk tree, so there's also some information about
>>> the chunk tree appended to the end of each superblock to bootstrap the
>>> virtual address space lookup.
>>
>> So maybe Austin can use btrfs-show-super -a on every device and see if
>> there's anything different on some of the devices, that shouldn't be
>> different? There must be something the kernel is tripping over that
>> the use space tools aren't for some reason.
>>
>>
>>
>>
> I actually did do so when this happened most recently (I just didn't
> think to mention it in the most recent e-mail), and nothing appeared to
> be different either between devices or within a given device (IIRC,
> there's 2 sb per device in each of the filesystems in question).
>
> I'm going to try and reproduce this in a VM for inspection as all the
> filesystems I had this issue with now seem to be working fine (with the
> exception of some errors in the data blocks of one that got caught by
> scrub).
>
After an a long time of trying to reproduce this in a Virtual Machine
with no success, and increasing issues from the motherboard in the
system in question culminating in it dying completely, I'm pretty sure
now that this was in fact a hardware problem and not a bug in BTRFS.
I've been unable to reproduce it at all after replacing the motherboard.
[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 3019 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-08-25 18:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-14 11:49 BTRFS raid6 unmountable after a couple of days of usage Austin S Hemmelgarn
2015-07-14 13:25 ` Austin S Hemmelgarn
2015-07-14 23:20 ` Chris Murphy
2015-07-15 11:07 ` Austin S Hemmelgarn
2015-07-15 15:45 ` Chris Murphy
2015-07-15 16:15 ` Hugo Mills
2015-07-15 21:29 ` Chris Murphy
2015-07-16 11:41 ` Austin S Hemmelgarn
2015-08-25 18:12 ` Austin S Hemmelgarn [this message]
2015-07-16 11:49 ` Austin S Hemmelgarn
2015-08-25 18:09 ` Austin S Hemmelgarn
[not found] <55A5B13C.6060009@spotprint.com.au>
2015-07-15 6:53 ` Ryan Bourne
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=55DCAFF6.3020007@gmail.com \
--to=ahferroin7@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lists@colorremedies.com \
/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.