Re: [PATCH][v2] btrfs: introduce rescue=onlyfs

Josef Bacik
2020-07-21T17:25:23Z

On 7/21/20 1:16 PM, David Sterba wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 04:56:55PM +0100, Graham Cobb wrote:
>> On 21/07/2020 16:10, Josef Bacik wrote:
>>> One of the things that came up consistently in talking with Fedora about
>>> switching to btrfs as default is that btrfs is particularly vulnerable
>>> to metadata corruption. If any of the core global roots are corrupted,
>>> the fs is unmountable and fsck can't usually do anything for you without
>>> some special options.
>>>
>>> Qu addressed this sort of with rescue=skipbg, but that's poorly named as
>>> what it really does is just allow you to operate without an extent root.
>>> However there are a lot of other roots, and I'd rather not have to do
>>>
>>> mount -o rescue=skipbg,rescue=nocsum,rescue=nofreespacetree,rescue=blah
>>>
>>> Instead take his original idea and modify it so it just works for
>>> everything. Turn it into rescue=onlyfs, and then any major root we fail
>>> to read just gets left empty and we carry on.
>>
>> Am I the only one who dislikes the name? "onlyfs" does not seem at all
>> meaningful to me, as a system manager - the people it is apparently
>> aimed at. I really don't understand what it is supposed to mean and it
>> sounds like some developer debugging option or something.
>
> No, you're not the only one. Changelog points to 'skipbg' as poor naming
> choice but 'onlyfs' is IMHO just as bad because it's supposed to be used
> by users so the naming need to take that into account.

I'm not married to the name, I think its awful but I had no better ideas nor
suggestions from the last time I posted, tho I'm partial to
rescue=allthefuckingthings. However I'm fine with rescue=max also, is that
everybody's favorite? Thanks,

Josef