similar to: [PATCH] btrfs-progs: No-op when called as fsck.btrfsck

NOTE: in order to apply this patch you should: git mv btrfsck.c cmd-fsck.c This patch moves btrfsck in to "btrfs fsck". It also adds support for symlinks to the btrfs binary to retain compablity, =) I think something should be done to the help description but i''m not sure what... Anyway, feedback is welcome. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe

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

Hi there, I am newbie and recently started using btrfs. Now facing a weird problem. FWIW, I am on archlinux, kenel v3.8.0, having Btrfs v0.20-rc1. After an abnormal reboot, getting these errors while boot: systemd.fsck[289]: checking extents systemd.fsck[289]: checking fs roots systemd.fsck[289]: checking root refs systemd.fsck[289]: found 23728128 bytes used err is 0 systemd.fsck[289]: total

Hi folks! Been using btrfs for quite a while now, worked great until now. Got power-loss on my machine and now i have the "parent transid verify failed on X wanted X found X" problem. So I can''t get it to mount. My btrfs is spread over sda (2tb), sdc(2tb), sdd(1tb). Is this something that an offline fsck could fix ? If so is the fsck-util being developed ? Is there a way to

Hey, I''d start by saying that I know Btrfs is a still experimental, and so there''s no guarantee that one would be able to help me at all... But I thought I''ll try anyway :-) Few months ago I bought a new laptop and installed ArchLinux on it, with Btrfs on the root filesystem... I know, it''s not the smartest thing to do... After a few month I had issues with my

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

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

Dear list members, In my previous thread at http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org/msg23333.html there was a space_cache kernel bug/panic on kernel 3.8. I could successfully "fix" that with rebuilding the cache. But some files were missing/corrupted. So I booted a rescue CD with kernel 3.7 and ran btrfsck --repair, which repaired quite a few things. After a reboot I

Hello Team for personnal use, I''m interested in cosolidating all my ext4 sub-filesystems into a single one using BTRFS. I can"t afford loosing my data... and my question is : is there a release date for the fsck tool for btrfs ? Thanx in advance Herve (from France) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to

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

Hello I think, I somewhat destroyed my btrfs filesystem on my Ubuntu 13.04 kernel 3.8.0-25-lowlatency system. It got destroyed, because the system was hanging for some other reason and I had to remove power... When I try to mount my filesystem (there''s only one, with a few subfilesystems), the system crashes. Also btrfsck dies; always like this: a@ask-home:~$ sudo

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

Hello! Today I downgraded from Ubuntu''s APT repo "oneiric-proposed" (which brings some kernel 3.0.0-13) back to the standard repo "oneiric". Now I''m not able to mount my btrfs / and /home (both on the same partition) anymore: device fsid SOME-UUID devid 1 transid 84229 /dev/dm-0 parent transid verify failed on 77078528 wanted 83774 found 84226

Hi, I will send a series patches that add snapshot/subvol deletion soon. But the way to delete snapshot/subvol is far from people''s expectancy. To delete a snapshot/subvol, we need four steps: 1) snapshot/subvol deletion ioctl or rmdir; 2) umount; 3) btrfsck; 4) mount the fs. The reason for this is bug in root back & forward references. In simple terms, the bug prevents us from

Hi List, so first the basics. I''m running Arch Linux with 3.13-rc2, btrfs-progs 0.20rc1.3-2 from the repo and I''m using a SSD. So I was having kernel panics with my USB 3.0 Gigabit card and was trying to get a panic output. These panics are intermittent and most often happen while using Chromium. Anyway so my system paniced while I was in Chromium. After the reboot Chromium

Hello, Trying to balance a 2TB filesystem on the 3.8.5 kernel: Label: ''p2'' uuid: 01f6cc8b-d305-40e1-bac8-8fdd548f611e Total devices 1 FS bytes used 1.32TB devid 1 size 1.80TB used 1.37TB path /dev/sda2 System: total=4.00MB, used=156.00KB Data+Metadata: total=1.37TB, used=1.32TB I am getting a Segmentation fault in ''btrfs'' utility, and following in

Add the new API btrfs-fsck to check the btrfs filesystem. Btrfs is currently under heavy development, and not suitable for any uses other than benchmarking and review. But it'll be useful in the near future. Signed-off-by: Wanlong Gao <gaowanlong at cn.fujitsu.com> --- daemon/btrfs.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++ generator/generator_actions.ml | 11 +++++++++++

Hi there, I have a system on which btrfsck gives the following output... I don''t understand the meaning of the reported errors, so any clue would be appreciated. Is this something I should worry about, or not ? Would I be advised to try "--repair" ? (Last time I tried this one, it completely b0rked a filesystem, beyond repair, and my wife would kill me ifever I trash this one,

I have accidently damaged the first block(s) of a btrfs partition and can''t mount it anymore. I can see that my data is still intact by running a command like: cat /dev/sda5 | hexdump -C | more Do any (experimental) tools exist which would allow me to recover the files? Thank you -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a

Hello. I am continuing my tests of BtrFS under a practical workload. Recently an incorrect poweroff (or maybe a small bug in BtrFS) caused a small data loss. The actual damage was non-existent. I used old branch, so maybe the relevant code is already improved. 1. Why btrfsck says "bad block" on that partition? What does it mean? My fist reaction was to use badblocks. It found no