From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.bitfolk.com (use.bitfolk.com [85.119.80.223]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 27AF3158D68 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 21:41:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=85.119.80.223 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706564489; cv=none; b=basEti2u6LZYszHi96krm1OvmLcdLJBNxIRKzTdzKx6tSgNJswejiCCD4Gohq7/wsXIA7iLFEOFdabeO248y6fQEK8LjFY8x9MMLLlmWSFp0TUFPKWWhBvIhGrOW2izY4yxbrq4cX31tV/0bmRyX7g58rZ22QVr2Pp95tAseRSg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706564489; c=relaxed/simple; bh=exEcmYBx11MSji3/dVeI7KM0I+DiCd/9IFl4XYUYO1E=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=VmFC3VwDNIKJEoNgCUY+CVGyq25b7EnnN3r3a+Reqv1oyh+UFwkQnOG5j3yLr4gJgIEmTFDaDwAszYaZgfC6GP6eEU5Va6JAf6J93D92WAxGfX0F6+fqpac/TZTID4JiYxxLh0TmEQaVT0S1mJ6o7A3U80tooLr8GcaoDXBcoWc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=strugglers.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=strugglers.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=strugglers.net header.i=@strugglers.net header.b=nAmvl0+M; arc=none smtp.client-ip=85.119.80.223 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=strugglers.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=strugglers.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=strugglers.net header.i=@strugglers.net header.b="nAmvl0+M" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=strugglers.net; s=alpha; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date: Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-To; bh=19Rbv/K9gnDwd9JLIc+ipug6ieJB8xCB/UdtY7SnIqY=; b=nAmvl0+Mru842QEpWi15Z9yCnp +pz7w+a0j6iodiLTpI6UYlpwwd0yI9mckyMimrx/h4ccHZwxrviS1SGznobMYmT4oRi8KpxRfe/Qd cBiw6BYOCFf3QRQ1btWmKW0aDwBrb4/rFbzxV5MO+8sa/PjriW7ngCq2aLcT9iviYvNjPFZitnCmj X+pHSDbuCKI0pdqCRCV0+/1uqxdiBJIdbi/IUaZxk4MBXsnKkwT6q7yceFNIrxGX9QTROuYn29zJF 2dB+ghF9kmg4EQ5P+6HrvBAVHCTFZg2CXFwa6ELR/qzdaRbF7qr5j72pcMkkssEXeuyIiyC8bNSB8 bOsVjRZw==; Received: from andy by mail.bitfolk.com with local (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1rUZNc-0003YC-E5; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 21:41:24 +0000 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 21:41:24 +0000 From: Andy Smith To: Remi Gauvin Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: One missing device = fs not detected; upgrade things first? Message-ID: References: <3f3dcc01-6d23-4490-7b8d-98eff520bc85@georgianit.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <3f3dcc01-6d23-4490-7b8d-98eff520bc85@georgianit.com> OpenPGP: id=BF15490B; url=http://strugglers.net/~andy/pubkey.asc X-URL: http://strugglers.net/wiki/User:Andy X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: andy@strugglers.net X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on mail.bitfolk.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Hi Remi, On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 01:24:09PM -0500, Remi Gauvin wrote: > That is what lsblk output looks like to me.  There is no filesystem > information in the output.  Are you confusing lsblk and blkid? Maybe. But see later… > > Should I build new btrfs-progs and then a new kernel and just boot > > with those to see what happens, and then try the check --repair? Or > > should I just build the new kernel and see what that makes of the > > devices first, then build new btrfs-tools if I am still to run > > check? > > I would suggest the output of btrfs filesystem show, as well as the > exact mount command and any dmesg output when mount command is run. Hmm,. strange. Now: # btrfs fi sh Label: 'tank' uuid: 472ee2b3-4dc3-4fc1-80bc-5ba967069ceb Total devices 7 FS bytes used 3.72TiB devid 5 size 2.73TiB used 2.44TiB path /dev/sdj devid 6 size 1.82TiB used 1.53TiB path /dev/sdf devid 8 size 931.51GiB used 839.00GiB path /dev/sdh devid 9 size 931.51GiB used 857.00GiB path /dev/sde devid 10 size 1.75TiB used 1.67TiB path /dev/sdg devid 12 size 1.75TiB used 548.50GiB path /dev/sdi *** Some devices missing # mount -t btrfs -odegraded /dev/sde /srv/tank (long pause, but eventually worked) Logged: 2024-01-29T21:14:01.748805+00:00 specialbrew.localnet kernel: [19014.852866] BTRFS info (device sdj): allowing degraded mounts 2024-01-29T21:14:01.748874+00:00 specialbrew.localnet kernel: [19014.852873] BTRFS info (device sdj): disk space caching is enabled 2024-01-29T21:14:01.768772+00:00 specialbrew.localnet kernel: [19014.866523] BTRFS warning (device sdj): devid 11 uuid 296b4aa0-434d-408e-8b8b-f11d93186a11 is missing 2024-01-29T21:14:01.768772+00:00 specialbrew.localnet kernel: [19014.866523] BTRFS warning (device sdj): devid 11 uuid 296b4aa0-434d-408e-8b8b-f11d93186a11 is missing 2024-01-29T21:14:03.512856+00:00 specialbrew.localnet kernel: [19016.615549] BTRFS info (device sdj): bdev (null) errs: wr 1, rd 0, flush 0, corrupt 0, gen 0 Admittedly I did not try "btrfs filesystem show" before, as the complete lack of spotting an fs on there, and "btrfs dev scan" seemingly doing nothing threw me a bit. But I DID try a mount before, which failed saying it couldn't find a superblock. Yet now it seems to have worked okay. Everything seems alright, I just need to work out what happened with that one drive. As for lsblk, it now says: # lsblk sde 8:64 0 931.5G 0 disk sdf 8:80 0 1.8T 0 disk sdg 8:96 0 1.8T 0 disk sdh 8:112 0 931.5G 0 disk sdi 8:128 0 1.8T 0 disk sdj 8:144 0 2.7T 0 disk /srv/tank but I suppose only because that is now mounted. Thanks! Andy