From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.21]:57484 "EHLO mout.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751545AbdCCL4I (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Mar 2017 06:56:08 -0500 Received: from thetick.localnet ([93.181.44.247]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Me8ws-1cwKZ11eFa-00Psjp for ; Fri, 03 Mar 2017 12:54:13 +0100 From: Marc Joliet To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [4.7.2] btrfs_run_delayed_refs:2963: errno=-17 Object already exists Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2017 12:54:07 +0100 Message-ID: <12726616.JRxLSmG3MF@thetick> In-Reply-To: <905fd8af-b3b5-343a-09b1-c2f569e8dd19@cn.fujitsu.com> References: <20160828152908.6e1325b5@jupiter.sol.kaishome.de> <1714469.dJ89oe0hXx@thetick> <905fd8af-b3b5-343a-09b1-c2f569e8dd19@cn.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart2424428.HGbY5iTYG0"; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: --nextPart2424428.HGbY5iTYG0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" On Friday 03 March 2017 09:00:10 Qu Wenruo wrote: > > FWIW, as per my later messages, after mounting with clear_cache and= > > letting > > btrfs-cleaner finish, btrfs-check did *not* print out those errors = after > > running again. It's now about two weeks later that the file system= is > > showing problems again. >=20 > If btrfs-check didn't print out *any* error, then it should be mostly= =20 > fine. (Unless there is some case we don't expose yet) >=20 > The problem should be caused by kernel AFAIK. So you think it could be a regression in 4.9? Should I try 4.10? Or i= s it=20 more likely just an undiscovered bug? > > Oh, and just in case it's relevant, the file system was created wit= h > > btrfs- > > convert (a long time, maybe 1.5 years ago, though; it was originall= y > > ext4). >=20 > Not sure if it's related. > But at least for that old convert, it's chunk layout is somewhat rare= =20 > and sometimes even bug-prone. >=20 > Did you balance the btrfs after convert? If so, it should be more lik= e a=20 > traditional btrfs then. Yes, I'm fairly certain I did that, as that is what the btrfs wiki reco= mmends. > Personally speaking I don't think it is relative for your bug, but mu= ch=20 > like a normal extent tree corruption seen in mail list. OK, so is there anything else I can do? Greetings =2D-=20 Marc Joliet =2D- "People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who kno= w we don't" - Bjarne Stroustrup --nextPart2424428.HGbY5iTYG0 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEax7Ya5gDQFOJHKGQv9DmhiyIePQFAli5WV8ACgkQv9DmhiyI ePQzwRAAqCm3x1WuHmS12MpVPMQEWTTW2GtLQfaLlhcjiQ20B3ewS7vkv3TPZkfp veVI9hXLdSRPtAwj4dAp8ePmQ3NgYIQb6Fd7lRJkSqPDQkuEkw776/oJNy3PY4Z4 AVIjouP8G5q3F2SqF2pX1x35gmr72jel+V+kndHYBj/rXLMvCiDf2QKEShQr7UsU 1xTATkX4rDvj2X73cSHTuUqjPsDgpldJbuNYhy8bSLtw7ZJZ0vMUEvBiTYVT/Nak Vz2LMuQfGQasfrxn1mDGlb04k7FXaMUlFVlrpXh1AsRai8wiHQMmV+zVVszCkvP/ V76otnFQAus3VWkTWKVnaEbpwusFwegFFsFcMCUCeNqJrolcRMFrokap+/h5NFrE juvuIj2S7p3rffz716yBnQx4K/hA5a9Xm0VaoVzXw4ZWmC8DKbXD6gE+U9Gqyjq9 HtWq1cRFSKNx3xqBszOi2F0wk0Ij9+Jz/cW1EqzpipPYrO1KDKfht0bSclc1ypRz QDCaK8saxAGiICn6C3b9OgEw8JXS/gWb9JKgn0IYlnQ2m4F6+zB0hr7tHuMpctcB hC3Kvv3yMSFGEwK/0jdkj70s3ZzNrBNOsX7m/0uoNKMARtiCan0GE0EPPWmkJ2Mr 7UtbnSqbCrYApdrs+rX9RWxd0BUHYcelw8WrAibR2ncwUHUztwc= =I8m1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2424428.HGbY5iTYG0--