From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mailer.hiddenmail.net ([199.195.249.9]:37271 "EHLO mailer.hiddenmail.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965013AbcBQX4U convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Feb 2016 18:56:20 -0500 Received: from mailer by mailer.hiddenmail.net with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1aWBxD-0005ah-00 for linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org; Thu, 18 Feb 2016 00:56:19 +0100 Message-ID: <1455753376.6690.8.camel@fs.16bits.net> Subject: Re: bad extent [5993525264384, 5993525280768), type mismatch with chunk From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=C1ngel_Gonz=E1lez?= To: "linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 00:56:16 +0100 In-Reply-To: <56C420A3.1000508@cn.fujitsu.com> References: <1447365063.7045.7.camel@scientia.net> <1455581697.6951.9.camel@fs.16bits.net> <56C27D8F.2000006@cn.fujitsu.com> <1455661288.1700.8.camel@fs.16bits.net> <56C420A3.1000508@cn.fujitsu.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Qu Wenruo wrote: > If you're really interesting in whether your fs has skinny metadata  > enabled, you can check btrfs-show-super output. > Like the following output indicates skinny metadata: > ------ > incompat_flags 0x161 > ( MIXED_BACKREF | >   BIG_METADATA | >   EXTENDED_IREF | >   SKINNY_METADATA ) << ------ > > Even it has skinny metadata, it's still possible that some metadata > are still in old format if you used btrfstune to convert an old fs to > skinny metadata. It was a freshly created filesystem. However, btrfs-show-super shows it does *not* have skinny metadata: > incompat_flags 0x61 > ( MIXED_BACKREF | >   BIG_METADATA | >   EXTENDED_IREF ) Maybe gparted explicitely requested it to be created without skinny metadata. That won't make me lose my sleep, though. > But anyway, it's always good to see the problem solved. Indeed :-) Thanks again