Re: BTRFS 3.8.7 Kernel Crash Report

[Mark Ridley <mark@backupsystems.co.uk>]

Any idea when the 3.9 kernel will be out.

I see there are lots of btrfs fixes going into it.

I'm currently running FC18 on 3.8.7, although 10 minutes ago it got
updated to 3.8.8.

On 22/04/2013 15:28, "Harald Glatt" <mail@hachre.de> wrote:

>I think it won't... That would just be the goal eventually. If scrub
>sees no errors all the data should be in tact and your best bet to get
>things working perfectly again is to create a new filesystem and
>transfer the data into it.
>
>I'm not a dev and I can't say if a btrfs-image for debugging purposes
>would be helpful in this case or not, maybe this kind of corrution has
>been fixed a long time ago and wouldn't happen again in up-to-date
>versions of btrfs anyway.
>
>On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Mark Ridley <mark@backupsystems.co.uk>
>wrote:
>> Thanks for getting back to me.
>>
>> Do you think remount fixes the keys reverted problem?
>>
>> On 22/04/2013 15:18, "Harald Glatt" <mail@hachre.de> wrote:
>>
>>>Only data errors (from CRC checks), maybe also some structure errors -
>>>I'm not sure. A remount should fix all errors. If it doesn't I think
>>>it's considered a bug - ultimately the goal is that no --repair should
>>>ever be required... Scrub is generally safe though, unlike btrfsck
>>>--repair.
>>>
>>>On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 4:16 PM, Mark Ridley <mark@backupsystems.co.uk>
>>>wrote:
>>>> What does btrfs scrub do?
>>>>
>>>> Is that meant to detect and fix problems?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Mark
>>>>
>>>> On 22/04/2013 15:13, "Harald Glatt" <mail@hachre.de> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Yeah, --repair is not recommended as of now. Maybe posting the btrfsck
>>>>>output just from checking would be helpful in this case.
>>>>>
>>>>>On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Mark Ridley
>>>>><mark@backupsystems.co.uk>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>> No.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Without --repair pointed out some problems, but whats the point of
>>>>>>knowing
>>>>>> about the problems if they can't be fixed so I ran with --repair and
>>>>>>it
>>>>>> broke the volume.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 22/04/2013 15:02, "Harald Glatt" <mail@hachre.de> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 4:01 PM, Mark Ridley
>>>>>>><mark@backupsystems.co.uk>
>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>> Thanks, David.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What causes this corruption and how can I fix it?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm very worried about running btrfs.fsck as last time it made a
>>>>>>>>slight
>>>>>>>> corruption like this worse and the whole volume had to be trashed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> After fsck the "available space" on df ended up being negative so
>>>>>>>>nothing
>>>>>>>> could be written to the volume.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Mark
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 22/04/2013 14:42, "David Sterba" <dsterba@suse.cz> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 01:19:41PM +0000, Mark Ridley wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> If I then use rsync --inplace to update the images, I get a
>>>>>>>>>>btrfs
>>>>>>>>>>stack
>>>>>>>>>>trace
>>>>>>>>>> and btrfs hangs:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This happens every night.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> [<ffffffffa00bd5c1>] btrfs_set_item_key_safe+0x141/0x150 [btrfs]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>The check fails because it finds keys in reverted order. Given the
>>>>>>>>>conditions under which it happens I think it's an on-disk
>>>>>>>>>corruption
>>>>>>>>>and
>>>>>>>>>fsck should be able to at least detect it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>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
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>This happened without --repair?
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>