From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.archlinux.org (mail.archlinux.org [95.216.189.61]) (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 ED7F91448ED for ; Fri, 13 Sep 2024 05:25:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.216.189.61 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1726205155; cv=none; b=iRH3dNaofVdT56gs8mdt9WMNtjVaU3jWqsGenkemMnHKknxkY0lCLxhHRf0oH8BwgBelQHab5+BHbp5IN82SJvPT63b8zJrvrKNSe0ePhrAYTGHX7DmT4rYFSjS+/LEKmlf+GXKp7GhbCOMds6yl09Fw+op1c6doNpFJ/PsOp+8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1726205155; c=relaxed/simple; bh=k/8bxqVjSV1Yab8fiaIn7nhxoU5s3j6uizbiwHrhmyU=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=H1KOwazAruE/T8jtSJ7ykx0cNe7mZlcaJ5Zwg0VrBzQOVQ4hsfbzMglGQC5FBHZWHGCE/4OwytgoKQ9RKM6mO6XxTNvhXMAQruTW8kd2jysGQQfnk9gLv6d2wfRf+UQkQ/QGKcYX7s5jujhU2JlSX6zwjcvwFuyw7cMC1U6J3l0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=archlinux.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=archlinux.org; dkim=pass (4096-bit key) header.d=archlinux.org header.i=@archlinux.org header.b=vSONBOMC; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=archlinux.org header.i=@archlinux.org header.b=NUZHDXix; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.216.189.61 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=archlinux.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=archlinux.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (4096-bit key) header.d=archlinux.org header.i=@archlinux.org header.b="vSONBOMC"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=archlinux.org header.i=@archlinux.org header.b="NUZHDXix" Message-ID: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=archlinux.org; s=dkim-rsa; t=1726205143; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=jdcmefc0hK9z/Udz4aMmKjHAgTI2YwkksVKgVlZqvkQ=; b=vSONBOMCcc+omLEwcnsrdvmkI5K6j9o3mQ5vYW6KTVN6NSd9X4tB1GcL4UZSs1Kh8f00Jw im0nBqvsUFnzwpdV0kvsD+UocHRoI2JdP4CJf0MfVx3mGL7w+lCgP7hQ/iSnuFqUZhHN9U EKC/kjyllfuHxn0skSJxJ5hqbOwYSqO8D0FfYDa/mXY02y2KbQVS9LWmzaimMvRXnUUOOA 6wcgmkGovWufWrxAAPVh07fQynZ4dzFxKZtWubcgHpNthjjIkjISysAMPmY+9JP8+eyrO9 PeJBCm0LvD6AqNc88SiAJ76hMantReCnyw/IJCR2+C4lDSRqjCN7LjsTCUTYYaX12GZXFv D3VtSxo0aAlx8/xtSmrViEPKypFuk7LzYBQ+45ZPQthOaHVgfkRTgYbL5PAivhwsnW02eW qPIv3onFccgAPDQntVQaIDvKearWONUmHfkD1/1BZPJMoU+vW2VaVuFBKPd3gYX6mZMpCx Db5sIOXPC3CSeni9AooI7uYHp+SJ9RcBHoJSNDWA88i4YOocc89I0W9725ZhI48mhSXHYQ FdhlNTH+QL/vn55jH6W0tqTShUTk6D9sIfub7u+nsj+4Arj3wfrVIQgb5LNcnH5pOmRYhr Yp9yf+2AS7477tLKwPu62Q+kOYn9y8xuHpE3Qnbor2jzbgKtixXns= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=archlinux.org; s=dkim-ed25519; t=1726205143; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=jdcmefc0hK9z/Udz4aMmKjHAgTI2YwkksVKgVlZqvkQ=; b=NUZHDXixPTqJnX38V7EPwlbYSgItzt776eJzbFgitQod1dvAMa+JrWZbUiX9QDQbiJ8nSl +Qj7d7jp9/QS3FBQ== Authentication-Results: mail.archlinux.org; auth=pass smtp.auth=archange smtp.mailfrom=archange@archlinux.org Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2024 09:25:36 +0400 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Critical error from Tree-checker To: Qu Wenruo , Qu Wenruo , linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org References: <9541deea-9056-406e-be16-a996b549614d@archlinux.org> <244f1d2b-f412-4860-af34-65f630e7f231@gmx.com> <3fa8f466-7da9-4333-9af7-36dabc2a2047@gmx.com> <4803f696-2dc5-4987-a353-fce1272e93e7@archlinux.org> <914ea24d-aa0d-4f01-8c5e-96cf5544f931@gmx.com> <2cec94bd-fc5e-4e9c-acc9-fb8d58ca3ee1@archlinux.org> <57614727-8097-4b43-93f5-d08a078cbde9@gmx.com> <66e28d81-7162-4ab4-b321-088ee733678e@archlinux.org> <523adab7-9a88-4c27-93bf-a85fd87162d8@gmx.com> <3bfdf0ee-9efa-44b8-b9fd-cabcf90875ec@archlinux.org> <650f2de0-c5e5-4e3c-aa0e-ff79d931a263@gmx.com> <1ee66f34-b855-4a96-bf75-a3d14b9ce392@suse.com> Content-Language: fr-FR, en-GB-large From: Archange In-Reply-To: <1ee66f34-b855-4a96-bf75-a3d14b9ce392@suse.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Le 13/09/2024 à 01:42, Qu Wenruo a écrit : > > > 在 2024/9/12 21:43, Archange 写道: >> Le 12/09/2024 à 14:23, Qu Wenruo a écrit : >>> 在 2024/9/12 19:34, Archange 写道: >>>> Le 12/09/2024 à 14:01, Qu Wenruo a écrit : >>>>> 在 2024/9/12 19:27, Archange 写道: >>>>>> […] >>>>>> >>>>>> [3/7] checking free space tree >>>>>> there is no free space entry for 0-65536 >>>>>> cache appears valid but isn't 0 >>>>> >>>>> Then it's totally fine. >>>>> >>>>> For the 0-65536 problem, mind to provide the following dump? >>>>> >>>>> # btrfs ins dump-tree -t fst >>>>> >>>>> I'm afraid since the fs is somewhat old, there may be some corner >>>>> case >>>>> btrfs-check is not handling properly. >>>> >>>> ERROR: unexpected tree id suffix of 'fst': t >>> >>> My bad, it should be "btrfs ins dump-tree -t free-space ". >> >> The output is too big for an email, so uploaded here: >> >> https://paste.xinu.at/XtR8/ >> >>> And if possible, also "btrfs ins dump-tree -t extent " just >>> in case. >> >> Same thing (even bigger), also output on the terminal and while >> redirecting to a file was quite different (but maybe that’s more >> because something changed between the two calls), so here are: >> >> – the cli run : https://paste.xinu.at/9vs/ >> >> – the file run: https://paste.xinu.at/XpzhbZ/ > > Thanks a lot. > > This indeed shows a very old filesystem, and for a long long time, we > no longer create any block group at logical bytenr 0, thus it shows an > corner case that older fs layout doesn't exclude the first 1MiB. IIRC this file system was created in 2016. > And it's indeed a false alert. > > In that case, as long as you still have unallocated space, you can > just relocate the system chunks: > > # btrfs balacne start -s > > Which should move the system chunks to new locations and will not > utilize the first 1MiB reserved space. # btrfs balance start -s / ERROR: Refusing to explicitly operate on system chunks. Pass --force if you really want to do that. According to https://btrfs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/btrfs-balance.html, -s requires -f, so I guess I should continue with that? Regards, Archange