From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr0-f178.google.com ([209.85.128.178]:45948 "EHLO mail-wr0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751909AbeA2OuJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Jan 2018 09:50:09 -0500 Received: by mail-wr0-f178.google.com with SMTP id 16so7476765wry.12 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2018 06:50:09 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <6d5bfa3f-3c49-1380-2bcf-d6eeca57020a@gmx.com> <0662a08f-5869-3eb3-5ab2-391ba9603095@gmx.com> <80321b99-a89c-fadf-8f1a-26ed8f598a66@gmx.com> <802534f4-55cd-8404-5c21-4f383468c7e5@gmx.com> <1e6c6814-d120-144b-bed7-c1dac0d140d3@gmx.com> <365e746e-de87-2977-daee-7b2335c545b1@gmx.com> From: "^m'e" Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 14:49:48 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: btrfs check: backref lost, mismatch with its hash -- can't repair To: Qu Wenruo Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 2:04 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > > On 2018年01月29日 21:58, ^m'e wrote: >> Thanks for the advice, Qu! >> >> I used the system for a while, did some package upgrades -- writing in >> the suspect corrupted area. Then tried a btrfs-send to my backup vol, >> and it failed miserably with a nice kernel oops. >> >> So I went for a lowmem repair: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> # ./btrfsck.static check --repair --mode=lowmem /dev/sdb3 2>&1 | tee >> /mnt/custom/rescue/btrfs-recovery/btrfs-repair.BTR-POOL.1.log >> WARNING: low-memory mode repair support is only partial >> Fixed 0 roots. >> checking extents >> checking free space cache >> checking fs roots >> ERROR: failed to add inode 28891726 as orphan item root 257 >> ERROR: root 257 INODE[28891726] is orphan item > > At least I need dig the kernel code further to determine if the orphan > inode handling in btrfs-progs is correct or not. > > So there won't be more dirty fix soon. > > Hopefully you could get some good backup and restore the system. > > At least the problem is limited to a very small range, and it's > something we could handle easily. > > Thanks for all your report, > Qu > > Right. Meanwhile, could you please suggest the best course of action? btrfs rescue or restore? I have snapshots of my two subvols (rootfs, home -- now fs-checking them just in case...) Cheers, Marco