Displaying 2 results from an estimated 2 matches for "btfsck".
Did you mean:
btrfsck
2010 Dec 01
2
[RFC PATCH 4/4 v2] Btrfs: deal with filesystem state at mount, umount
...@@ out:
return 0;
}
+static void btrfs_check_super_valid(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info,
+ int read_only)
+{
+ if (read_only)
+ return;
+
+ if (fs_info->fs_state & BTRFS_SUPER_FLAG_ERROR)
+ printk(KERN_WARNING "warning: mount fs with errors, "
+ "running btfsck is recommended\n");
+}
+
static struct extent_io_ops btree_extent_io_ops = {
.write_cache_pages_lock_hook = btree_lock_page_hook,
.readpage_end_io_hook = btree_readpage_end_io_hook,
--
1.7.1
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body o...
2014 Mar 05
0
[PATCH] Btrfs-progs: remove unused variable and update btrfs-image man page
...s.btrfs /dev/sdb2 -f
$ ./btrfs-image /dev/sdb2 btrfs_image_output
$ ./btrfs-image -r btrfs_image_output disk-image
$ ./btrfsck disk-image
Device extent[1, 29360128, 8388608] didn't find the relative chunk.
Device extent[1, 1111490560, 1073741824] didn't find the relative chunk.
Ideally btfsck should be updated to reflect this default behavior and
not through these messages, but it isn't harmful and can be done
later.
Signed-off-by: Rakesh Pandit <rakesh@tuxera.com>
---
btrfs-image.c | 3 ---
man/btrfs-image.8.in | 5 ++++-
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions...