Re: Question about a specific error.

["Austin S. Hemmelgarn" <ahferroin7@gmail.com>]

On 2016-02-01 15:21, Hugo Mills wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 02:44:24PM -0500, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
>> In the process of trying to debug issues I'm having on one of my
>> systems with a new kernel version, I decided to do a dry run check on
>> the root filesystem.  'btrfs check' returned a bunch of lines like:
>>
>> root 257 inode XXXXXX errors 2000, link count wrong
>>          unresolved ref dir YYYYY index 53 namelen 3 name LOG filetype 0 errors 3, no dir item, no dir index
>>
>> I got about 20 messages like this with varying values for everything
>> except the filetype and error counts.  Based on what I can tell, these
>> look like orphaned inodex, but I'm not certain.
>> Is it safe to tell BTRFS to try and fix these errors?
>
>     Yes, those are errors I'd expect btrfs check --repair to handle
> properly.
>
OK, it looks like things were fixed safely, but I'm not 100% certain 
that it fixed things the way it should have.  All of the files it 
reported got moved to /lost+found (which makes me think it thought they 
were orphaned items), but none of the files themselves showed any issues 
in regular usage (they were all perfectly visible beforehand in the 
regular directory structure, and there were no errors accessing them). 
On top of that, it pulled out two different versions of each one, one 
from more than a year ago, and one current version.  I think btrfs check 
may have gotten either confused or over-zealous and just decided it 
needed to pull out the current, perfectly fine versions of the files as 
well.