From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B62C9C5ACAE for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 09:09:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9118E208C2 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 09:09:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730371AbfILJJK (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Sep 2019 05:09:10 -0400 Received: from mail02.iobjects.de ([188.40.134.68]:51896 "EHLO mail02.iobjects.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725940AbfILJJK (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Sep 2019 05:09:10 -0400 Received: from tux.wizards.de (pD9EBF359.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [217.235.243.89]) by mail02.iobjects.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EA7FD4162722; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 11:09:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.100.223] (ragnarok.applied-asynchrony.com [192.168.100.223]) by tux.wizards.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8EF8EEB932; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 11:09:08 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Re: Massive filesystem corruption since kernel 5.2 (ARCH) To: James Harvey Cc: linux-btrfs References: <11e4e889f903ddad682297c4420faeb0245414cf.camel@scientia.net> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Holger_Hoffst=c3=a4tte?= Organization: Applied Asynchrony, Inc. Message-ID: <3b972dc4-9dc6-620e-9bf8-79ec2df5cec7@applied-asynchrony.com> Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 11:09:08 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org On 9/12/19 10:24 AM, James Harvey wrote: > On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 3:51 AM Filipe Manana wrote: >> ... >> >> Until the fix gets merged to 5.2 kernels (and 5.3), I don't really >> recommend running 5.2 or 5.3. > > What is your recommendation for distributions that have been shipping > 5.2.x for quite some time, where a distro-wide downgrade to 5.1.x > isn't really an option that will be considered, especially because > many users aren't using BTRFS? Can/should your patch be backported to > 5.2.13/5.2.14? Or, does it really need to be applied to 5.3rc or git > master? Or, is it possibly not the right fix for the corruption risk, > and should a flashing neon sign be given to users to just run 5.1.x > even though the distribution repos have 5.2.x? It applies and works just fine in 5.2.x, I have it running in .14. If your distribution doesn't apply patches or just ships a random release-of-the month kernel, well.. ¯\(ツ)/¯ > What is your recommendation for users who have been running 5.2.x and > running into a lot of hangs? Would you say to apply your patch to a > custom-compiled kernel, or to downgrade to 5.1.x? 5.1.x is EOL upstream and you might be missing other critical things like security fixes. Considering how easy it is to build a custom kernel from an existing configuration, the former. -h