btrfs userland interface isn't 32/64bit clean (breaks lsattr and btrfs send)

btrfs userland interface isn't 32/64bit clean (breaks lsattr and btrfs send)

[Marc MERLIN]

I was trying to make sense out of this:
gargamel:~# lsattr
lsattr: Inappropriate ioctl for device While reading flags on ./satapmtool
lsattr: Inappropriate ioctl for device While reading flags on ./usbreset


As well as the btrfs send issue I reported:
gargamel:/mnt/btrfs_pool1# btrfs send media_ro.20140222_11:12:53 | less
At subvol media_ro.20140222_11:12:53
ERROR: send ioctl failed with -25: Inappropriate ioctl for device

I was trying to figure out why it was failing on one system while it was working 
on my other ones with the same kernel.

In the end I pinned it down to this:
3.13.5's kernel/userland interface fails if my kernel is 64bit and my
userland 32bit.

lsattr and btrfs send, and maybe more things fail, but they started working
the moment I updated my kernel to 32bit

Is this difficult to fix?
Do I need to file bugs with some folks, or this mail is enough?

Thanks,
Marc
-- 
"A mouse is a device used to point at the xterm you want to type in" - A.S.R.
Microsoft is to operating systems ....
                                      .... what McDonalds is to gourmet cooking
Home page: http://marc.merlins.org/  

Re: btrfs userland interface isn't 32/64bit clean (breaks lsattr and btrfs send)

[Duncan]

Marc MERLIN posted on Sun, 23 Feb 2014 21:51:03 -0800 as excerpted:

> In the end I pinned it down to this:
> 3.13.5's kernel/userland interface fails if my kernel is 64bit and my
> userland 32bit.

This is a known issue.  There's patches in the pipeline for 32-bit 
userspace on a 64-bit kernel, already.

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

Re: btrfs userland interface isn't 32/64bit clean (breaks lsattr and btrfs send)

[Hugo Mills]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 919 bytes --]

On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 06:32:14AM +0000, Duncan wrote:
> Marc MERLIN posted on Sun, 23 Feb 2014 21:51:03 -0800 as excerpted:
> 
> > In the end I pinned it down to this:
> > 3.13.5's kernel/userland interface fails if my kernel is 64bit and my
> > userland 32bit.
> 
> This is a known issue.  There's patches in the pipeline for 32-bit 
> userspace on a 64-bit kernel, already.

   If you mean my recent patch, that's only for receive. I've not
noticed any other issues on my 32/64 system, but I've not done much
with it either (with btrfs, it's only really used for btrfs receive --
everything else is ext4).

   Hugo.

-- 
=== Hugo Mills: hugo@... carfax.org.uk | darksatanic.net | lug.org.uk ===
  PGP key: 65E74AC0 from wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net or http://www.carfax.org.uk
         --- Welcome to Hollywood, a land just off the coast ---         
                            of Planet Earth.                             

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 811 bytes --]

Re: btrfs userland interface isn't 32/64bit clean (breaks lsattr and btrfs send)

[Duncan]

Hugo Mills posted on Mon, 24 Feb 2014 08:29:38 +0000 as excerpted:

> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 06:32:14AM +0000, Duncan wrote:
>> 
>> This is a known issue.  There's patches in the pipeline for 32-bit
>> userspace on a 64-bit kernel, already.
> 
>    If you mean my recent patch, that's only for receive. I've not
> noticed any other issues on my 32/64 system, but I've not done much with
> it either (with btrfs, it's only really used for btrfs receive --
> everything else is ext4).

Thanks.  Yes, I believe that's what I had in mind.  So apparently there's 
more needed.  (I /think/ I might have seen at least one additional patch 
float by for 32/64, but as it's out of my usage domain I'm not paying 
/that/ much attention to it, so perhaps not.)

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

Re: btrfs userland interface isn't 32/64bit clean (breaks lsattr and btrfs send)

[Marc MERLIN]

On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 08:43:44AM +0000, Duncan wrote:
> Hugo Mills posted on Mon, 24 Feb 2014 08:29:38 +0000 as excerpted:
> 
> > On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 06:32:14AM +0000, Duncan wrote:
> >> 
> >> This is a known issue.  There's patches in the pipeline for 32-bit
> >> userspace on a 64-bit kernel, already.
> > 
> >    If you mean my recent patch, that's only for receive. I've not
> > noticed any other issues on my 32/64 system, but I've not done much with
> > it either (with btrfs, it's only really used for btrfs receive --
> > everything else is ext4).
> 
> Thanks.  Yes, I believe that's what I had in mind.  So apparently there's 
> more needed.  (I /think/ I might have seen at least one additional patch 
> float by for 32/64, but as it's out of my usage domain I'm not paying 
> /that/ much attention to it, so perhaps not.)

In the meantime, if that helps someone, on debian it's trivial to get
64bit for some packages. All I had to do was this:
gargamel:/usr/src# dpkg --add-architecture amd64
gargamel:/usr/src# dpkg --print-foreign-architectures
amd64
gargamel:/usr/src# apt-get install e2fsprogs:amd64 btrfs-tools:amd64

And that's it.
Now I'm back in business with a 64bit kernel.

Marc
-- 
"A mouse is a device used to point at the xterm you want to type in" - A.S.R.
Microsoft is to operating systems ....
                                      .... what McDonalds is to gourmet cooking
Home page: http://marc.merlins.org/                         | PGP 1024R/763BE901