From: Anand Jain <Anand.Jain@oracle.com>
To: dsterba@suse.cz, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>,
linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] btrfs-progs: use BTRFS_SCAN_BACKUP_SB flag in btrfs_scan_one_device
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 19:46:48 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51406728.5030705@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130311181635.GH7229@twin.jikos.cz>
Thanks Eric and David.
I have sent out V3 patch-set which will disable access
to backup super-block unless requested by the user.
here below are some test cases and results before and
after this fix.. which finds the patch works awesome.
--------
the original problem which all this started..
mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdb -f && yes| mkfs.ext4 /dev/sdb && mount /dev/sdb /ext4
~/before/mkfs.btrfs -f /dev/sdc /dev/sdd (run twice)
~/before/mkfs.btrfs -f /dev/sdc /dev/sdd
::
ERROR: unable to scan the device '/dev/sdb' - Device or resource busy
ERROR: unable to scan the device '/dev/sdb' - Device or resource busy
adding device /dev/sdd id 2
fs created label (null) on /dev/sdc
nodesize 4096 leafsize 4096 sectorsize 4096 size 3.11GB
after the fix.
# mkfs.btrfs -f /dev/sdc /dev/sdd
WARNING! - Btrfs v0.20-rc1-238-g170881a-dirty IS EXPERIMENTAL
WARNING! - see http://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org before using
adding device /dev/sdd id 2
fs created label (null) on /dev/sdc
nodesize 4096 leafsize 4096 sectorsize 4096 size 104.98GB
Btrfs v0.20-rc1-238-g170881a-dirty
-------------
# umount /ext4
# mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdb /dev/sdc -f && wipefs /dev/sdb
There is an existing bug..
# ~/before/btrfs check /dev/sdc --repair
enabling repair mode
warning, device 1 is missing
warning, device 1 is missing
warning devid 1 not found already
Checking filesystem on /dev/sdc
UUID: e03c477d-b696-46c1-bf79-43b8b8454f11
checking extents
checking fs roots
checking root refs
btrfs: extent-tree.c:2553: btrfs_reserve_extent: Assertion `!(ret)' failed.
Aborted (core dumped)
#
and its still there even after this patch :-)
# btrfs check /dev/sdc --repair
enabling repair mode
warning, device 1 is missing
warning, device 1 is missing
warning devid 1 not found already
Checking filesystem on /dev/sdc
UUID: e03c477d-b696-46c1-bf79-43b8b8454f11
checking extents
checking fs roots
checking root refs
btrfs: extent-tree.c:2553: btrfs_reserve_extent: Assertion `!(ret)' failed.
Aborted (core dumped)
-------------------------
# mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdb /dev/sdc -f && yes|mkfs.ext4 /dev/sdb
without the fix
# ~/before/btrfs restore -o /dev/sdb ~/tmp
ERROR: device scan failed '/dev/sdb' - Invalid argument
ERROR: device scan failed '/dev/sdb' - Invalid argument
Root objectid is 5
with the fix
# btrfs restore -o /dev/sdb ~/tmp
No valid Btrfs found on /dev/sdb
Could not open root, trying backup super
Root objectid is 5
now I say to use sb backup 1..
# btrfs restore -u 1 -o /dev/sdb ~/tmp
Root objectid is 5
# echo $?
0
--------------
# mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdb /dev/sdc -f && yes|mkfs.ext4 /dev/sdb
# ~/before/btrfs check /dev/sdc --repair
enabling repair mode
ERROR: device scan failed '/dev/sdb' - Invalid argument
ERROR: device scan failed '/dev/sdb' - Invalid argument
Checking filesystem on /dev/sdc
UUID: 5dc5c663-eeea-4ec2-b8fe-170157f5d68d
checking extents
checking fs roots
checking root refs
found 28672 bytes used err is 0
total csum bytes: 0
total tree bytes: 28672
total fs tree bytes: 8192
btree space waste bytes: 22420
file data blocks allocated: 0
referenced 0
Btrfs v0.20-rc1-235-gdd21bc1
# mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdb /dev/sdc -f && yes|mkfs.ext4 /dev/sdb
since now new code doesn't read backup SB of devid1
it hits the earlier known bug.
# btrfs check /dev/sdc --repair
enabling repair mode
warning, device 1 is missing
warning, device 1 is missing
warning devid 1 not found already
Checking filesystem on /dev/sdc
UUID: daa0dc6d-35b6-43ab-8333-894710a5b917
checking extents
checking fs roots
checking root refs
btrfs: extent-tree.c:2553: btrfs_reserve_extent: Assertion `!(ret)' failed.
Aborted (core dumped)
So user would need to fix the devid1 first.
# btrfs check /dev/sdb --repair
enabling repair mode
No valid Btrfs found on /dev/sdb
# btrfs check -s 1 /dev/sdb --repair
using SB copy 1, bytenr 67108864
enabling repair mode
Checking filesystem on /dev/sdb
UUID: daa0dc6d-35b6-43ab-8333-894710a5b917
checking extents
checking fs roots
checking root refs
found 28672 bytes used err is 0
total csum bytes: 0
total tree bytes: 28672
total fs tree bytes: 8192
btree space waste bytes: 22420
file data blocks allocated: 0
referenced 0
Btrfs v0.20-rc1-238-g170881a-dirty
# btrfs check /dev/sdc --repair
enabling repair mode
warning, device 1 is missing
warning, device 1 is missing
warning devid 1 not found already
Checking filesystem on /dev/sdc
UUID: daa0dc6d-35b6-43ab-8333-894710a5b917
checking extents
checking fs roots
checking root refs
btrfs: extent-tree.c:2553: btrfs_reserve_extent: Assertion `!(ret)' failed.
Aborted (core dumped)
Need to write back the backup SB to primary SB.
IMO when -s 1 was given it had the chance to fix
primary.. this can be fixed later.
# ./btrfs-select-super -s 1 /dev/sdb
using SB copy 1, bytenr 67108864
ERROR: device scan failed '/dev/sdb' - Invalid argument
# btrfs check /dev/sdc --repair
enabling repair mode
Checking filesystem on /dev/sdc
UUID: daa0dc6d-35b6-43ab-8333-894710a5b917
checking extents
checking fs roots
checking root refs
found 28672 bytes used err is 0
total csum bytes: 0
total tree bytes: 28672
total fs tree bytes: 8192
btree space waste bytes: 22420
file data blocks allocated: 0
referenced 0
Btrfs v0.20-rc1-238-g170881a-dirty
---------------------------------------------------------------
I am not sure if I have a wipe -a working for btrfs,
so I would clean using dd.
# dd if=/dev/zero bs=1 count=8 of=/dev/sdb seek=$((64*1024+64))
8+0 records in
8+0 records out
8 bytes (8 B) copied, 0.000324503 s, 24.7 kB/s
# dd if=/dev/zero bs=1 count=8 of=/dev/sdb seek=$((64*1024*1024+64))
8+0 records in
8+0 records out
8 bytes (8 B) copied, 0.000364635 s, 21.9 kB/s
# dd if=/dev/zero bs=1 count=8 of=/dev/sdb seek=$((256*1024*1024*1024+64))
dd: `/dev/sdb': cannot seek: Invalid argument
0+0 records in
0+0 records out
0 bytes (0 B) copied, 0.000430846 s, 0.0 kB/s
This behavior is same before and after the patch.
# btrfs check /dev/sdb
No valid Btrfs found on /dev/sdb
# btrfs check /dev/sdb -s 1
using SB copy 1, bytenr 67108864
No valid Btrfs found on /dev/sdb
# btrfs check /dev/sdb -s 2
using SB copy 2, bytenr 274877906944
No valid Btrfs found on /dev/sdb
#
------------------------
# mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdb /dev/sdc -f && mount /dev/sdc /btrfs
# dd if=/dev/zero bs=1 count=8 of=/dev/sdb seek=$((64*1024+64))
# dd if=/dev/zero bs=1 count=8 of=/dev/sdb seek=$((64*1024*1024+64))
# dd if=/dev/zero bs=1 count=8 of=/dev/sdb seek=$((256*1024*1024*1024+64))
# mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdb
WARNING! - Btrfs v0.20-rc1-238-g170881a-dirty IS EXPERIMENTAL
WARNING! - see http://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org before using
/dev/sdb is mounted
# umount /btrfs
# mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdb
WARNING! - Btrfs v0.20-rc1-238-g170881a-dirty IS EXPERIMENTAL
WARNING! - see http://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org before using
/dev/sdb appears to contain an existing filesystem (btrfs).
Use the -f option to force overwrite.
#
-------------------------
# mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdd /dev/sde -f
WARNING! - Btrfs v0.20-rc1-238-g170881a-dirty IS EXPERIMENTAL
WARNING! - see http://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org before using
adding device /dev/sde id 2
fs created label (null) on /dev/sdd
nodesize 4096 leafsize 4096 sectorsize 4096 size 93.22GB
Btrfs v0.20-rc1-238-g170881a-dirty
# mount /dev/sde /btrfs
# umount /btrfs
# dd if=/dev/zero bs=1 count=8 of=/dev/sde seek=$((64*1024+64))
8+0 records in
8+0 records out
8 bytes (8 B) copied, 0.0149415 s, 0.5 kB/s
remove /dev/sdd
# x="0 0 3 0"
# echo "scsi remove-single-device $x" > /proc/scsi/scsi
# lsscsi
[0:0:0:0] disk Sun boot1 V1.0 /dev/sda
[0:0:2:0] disk Sun boot3 V1.0 /dev/sdc
[0:0:4:0] disk Sun boot5 V1.0 /dev/sde
[0:1:0:0] disk SEAGATE ST914602SSUN146G 0603 -
[0:1:1:0] disk SEAGATE ST914602SSUN146G 0603 -
[0:3:0:0] enclosu ADAPTEC Virtual SGPIO 0 0001 -
# btrfs check /dev/sde
No valid Btrfs found on /dev/sde
# btrfs check /dev/sde -s 1
using SB copy 1, bytenr 67108864
warning, device 1 is missing
warning, device 1 is missing
warning devid 1 not found already
Checking filesystem on /dev/sde
UUID: fa08122d-832f-4f32-87ee-58eb9380d5da
checking extents
checking fs roots
checking root refs
found 815104 bytes used err is 0
total csum bytes: 0
total tree bytes: 28672
total fs tree bytes: 8192
btree space waste bytes: 21476
file data blocks allocated: 786432
referenced 786432
Btrfs v0.20-rc1-238-g170881a-dirty
# ./btrfs-select-super -s 1 /dev/sde
using SB copy 1, bytenr 67108864
ERROR: device scan failed '/dev/sdc' - Invalid argument
warning, device 1 is missing
warning, device 1 is missing
warning devid 1 not found already
# btrfs check /dev/sde
warning, device 1 is missing
warning, device 1 is missing
warning devid 1 not found already
Checking filesystem on /dev/sde
UUID: fa08122d-832f-4f32-87ee-58eb9380d5da
checking extents
checking fs roots
checking root refs
found 815104 bytes used err is 0
total csum bytes: 0
total tree bytes: 28672
total fs tree bytes: 8192
btree space waste bytes: 21476
file data blocks allocated: 786432
referenced 786432
Btrfs v0.20-rc1-238-g170881a-dirty
#
---------------
Thanks, Anand
On 03/12/2013 02:16 AM, David Sterba wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 10:03:46AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> IMHO, nothing should be checking the backup superblocks unless explicitly
>> told to.
>
> That's the whole point I believe.
>
> update the infrastructure, every SB access looks to the first copy
> unless told by command line options.
>
>
> david
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-13 11:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-08 15:24 [PATCH 0/3 v2] flags to access backup SB Anand Jain
2013-03-08 15:24 ` [PATCH 1/3] btrfs-progs: Introduce flag BTRFS_SCAN_REGISTER to replace run_ioctl Anand Jain
2013-03-08 15:24 ` [PATCH 2/3] btrfs-progs: Introduce flag BTRFS_SCAN_BACKUP_SB for btrfs_read_dev_super Anand Jain
2013-03-08 15:25 ` [PATCH 3/3] btrfs-progs: use BTRFS_SCAN_BACKUP_SB flag in btrfs_scan_one_device Anand Jain
2013-03-11 15:03 ` Eric Sandeen
2013-03-11 18:16 ` David Sterba
2013-03-13 11:46 ` Anand Jain [this message]
2013-03-14 8:51 ` Anand Jain
2013-03-13 11:44 ` [PATCH 0/3 v3] flags to access backup SB Anand Jain
2013-03-13 11:44 ` [PATCH 1/3 v3] btrfs-progs: Introduce flag BTRFS_SCAN_REGISTER to replace run_ioctl Anand Jain
2013-03-13 11:44 ` [PATCH 2/3 v3] btrfs-progs: Introduce flag BTRFS_SCAN_BACKUP_SB for btrfs_read_dev_super Anand Jain
2013-03-13 11:44 ` [PATCH 3/3 v3] btrfs-progs: disable using backup superblock by default Anand Jain
2013-03-14 3:05 ` [PATCH 0/3 v4] flags to access backup SB Anand Jain
2013-03-14 3:05 ` [PATCH 1/3 v4] btrfs-progs: Introduce flag BTRFS_SCAN_REGISTER to replace run_ioctl Anand Jain
2013-03-14 3:05 ` [PATCH 2/3 v4] btrfs-progs: Introduce flag BTRFS_SCAN_BACKUP_SB for btrfs_read_dev_super Anand Jain
2013-03-14 3:05 ` [PATCH 3/3 v4] btrfs-progs: disable using backup superblock by default Anand Jain
2013-03-14 4:36 ` Eric Sandeen
2013-03-14 8:56 ` Anand Jain
2013-03-14 14:47 ` Eric Sandeen
2013-03-14 14:49 ` Eric Sandeen
2013-03-15 12:03 ` Anand Jain
2013-03-15 16:34 ` Eric Sandeen
2013-03-18 3:39 ` Anand Jain
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=51406728.5030705@oracle.com \
--to=anand.jain@oracle.com \
--cc=dsterba@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sandeen@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).