similar to: btrfsck failures on old backup volumes

Signed-off-by: Goldwyn Rodrigues <rgoldwyn@gmail.com> --- man/Makefile | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ man/btrfsck.8.in | 17 +++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) create mode 100644 man/Makefile create mode 100644 man/btrfsck.8.in diff --git a/man/Makefile b/man/Makefile new file mode 100644 index 0000000..2665dd1 --- /dev/null +++ b/man/Makefile

i''m not a C developer, but i like to think i know enough to be dangerous (pragmatic) :-D building from git master failed with: .......... .......... gcc -Wp,-MMD,./.btrfsck.o.d,-MT,btrfsck.o -Wall -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -g -Werror -Os -c btrfsck.c cc1: warnings being treated as errors btrfsck.c: In function ‘maybe_free_inode_rec’: btrfsck.c:323:2: error: implicit

The new xfstests will run fsck against the volume to make sure we didn''t introduce any inconsistencies, which is nice except we will error out immediately if we mount with inode_cache. We need to make btrfsck skip the special free space cache items and then just assume that we have a link for the free space cache inode item. This makes btrfsck pass with success on a fs with inode cache

btrfs 0.19 Ubuntu 10.10 Linux linux 2.6.35-23-generic #41-Ubuntu SMP Wed Nov 24 11:55:36 UTC 2010 x86_64 GNU/Linux I create a new btrfs on a 200GB disk with one partition. I mount the partition. I create a snapshot of that partition. I unmount the partition. I run btrfsck and it says I have an "unresolved ref" error. If I create two snaps, I get three errors. If I create three snaps, I

Hi, I''m having a filesystem that''s been a bit mangled by external causes, so I thought I''d see how much I could salvage (it''s not critical, though). Thus, I pulled btrfsck from git and ran: pannekake:~/btrfs-progs# ./btrfsck --repair /dev/mapper/pannekake-backup-btrfs It spit out a ton of warnings like these (I can get the whole log if you''re

Signed-off-by: Yan Zheng <zheng.yan@oracle.com> --- diff -urp btrfs-progs-unstable/btrfsck.c btrfs-progs-2/btrfsck.c --- btrfs-progs-unstable/btrfsck.c 2009-09-28 15:54:55.980479398 +0800 +++ btrfs-progs-2/btrfsck.c 2010-01-31 09:46:24.645485459 +0800 @@ -581,7 +581,6 @@ again: } ret = insert_existing_cache_extent(dst, &ins->cache); if (ret == -EEXIST) { - WARN_ON(src ==

I tried an (offline) btrfsck and got the following error message: > btrfsck /dev/sdb3 btrfsck: btrfsck.c:584: splice_shared_node: Assertion `!(src == &src_node->root_cache)'' failed. Aborted I use kernel version 2.6.32.2 with builtin btrfs-drivers. Greetings, Michael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to

Heyho! (This is using btrfs from Debian''s 2.6.32 2.6.32-3-kirkwood kernel (-9 package; btrfs tools is v0.19-16-g075587c) A few observations about btrfsck: a btrfsck run on a 2T volume (4 disks) on a QNAP appliance (512M ram) got killed by Mr. OOM Killer. Initially, I was quite surprised. I''m only moderately surprised now since it might well be that I forgot to enable

Hi all, I''ve been playing with btrfs resize recently and run into strange looking behavior to me. One of my simple test scenario was following: - partition some block device (lets say sda sectors 2-2000 are sda1) - try to create btrfs on top of it (just mkfs.btrfs /dev/sda1) - fill the fs with data - unmount the device - let''s simulate usual mistake here: downsize the

Hi there, after my filesystem is broken (I have no idea why, because last shut down was nomal) I tried to repair it with btrfsck ( Btrfs v0.20-rc1-56-g6cd836d). But unfortunately the process breaks with: parent transid verify failed on 29896704 wanted 392661 found 395689 parent transid verify failed on 29896704 wanted 392661 found 395689 parent transid verify failed on 29896704 wanted 392661

Is anyone interested in some part of this filesystem to figure out how it failed? Or can I erase and start again? Kind regards, -Evert Vorster- On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 8:18 AM, Evert Vorster <evorster@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi there. > > I have a btrfs on a raw device. (/dev/sda insted of in a partition, like > /dev/sda1 ) > The device in question is a USB hard drive with a 1TB

Chris Mason on 10 Feb 13:17: > Excerpts from Ben Gamari''s message of 2011-02-09 21:52:20 -0500: > > Over the last several months there have been many claims regarding > > the release of the rewritten btrfsck. Unfortunately, despite > > numerous claims that it will be released Real Soon Now(c), I have > > yet to see even a repository with preliminary code. Did I

After upgrading from 2.6.39-rc7 to 2.6.39 this morning, I tried to mount my 3 disk btrfs volume (no subvolumes, space caching enabled, lzo compression) and received some parent transid errors (going back to rc7 didn''t help, though): btrfs: disk space caching is enabled parent transid verify failed on 6038227976192 wanted 337418 found 337853 parent transid verify failed on 6038227976192

Hi All, I''m trying to repair a broken fs using btrfsck and am hitting a failed assertion. I''d appreciate any suggestions for what to do next. Is there any thing I can do to help fix this bug? Any other information from my FS which would help? If the FS could be salvaged that would be a bonus, but I''m more interested in providing a useful bug report before wiping the

Is it expected that running btrfsck more than once will keep reporting errors? Below is the end of a btrfsck output when run the second time. backpointer mismatch on [111942471680 32768] owner ref check failed [111942471680 32768] ref mismatch on [111942504448 40960] extent item 1, found 0 Incorrect local backref count on 111942504448 root 5 owner 160739 offset 3440640 found 0 wanted 1 back

Hi, I had to review a samba setup recently where people experienced strange things. Basically they more from a solaris on phisical machines environment (locally hosted) running an old version of samba (2.x or even 1.x) to a Red Hat virtualized environement runing 3.6 (remotely hosted). The link between clients and server is really good (2x100Mb/s fiber) and browsing shares and opening office

Hi, I thought that I would attempt a quick little patch that will make btrfsck into a No-op when called as fsck.btrfsck. The reasoning is that the FAQ states that it is recommended and safe to do so, and the current 12.04 version of Ubuntu just symlinks fsck.btrfsck to btrfsck instead of /bin/true. PS - Apologies if I mess this git send-email up! Dan McGrath (1): btrfs-progs: No-op when

Hello everybody, compiling btrfs-progs from current git I get an error in btrfsck.c about undefined references. The attached patch adds an include for sys/stat.h which fixes the problem for me. Regards, Chris

On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 11:39:37AM +0200, Alexandre wrote: > Hi, > > I had to review a samba setup recently where people experienced strange > things. > Basically they more from a solaris on phisical machines environment > (locally hosted) running an old version of samba (2.x or even 1.x) to a Red > Hat virtualized environement runing 3.6 (remotely hosted). > The link

Exec btrfsck on btrfs with snapshots that are under a dropping progress will cause prompt on "ref mismatch". However we do not want this kind of prompt, since an remount operation will continue the dropping progress. Here the prompt is nonsense. Signed-off-by: Gui Hecheng <guihc.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> --- cmds-check.c | 101