Re: 5.5 kernel and btrfs-progs v5.6 create and cannot fix 'root 204162 inode 14058737 errors 1000, some csum missing'

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 4:47 PM Chris Murphy <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 2:39 PM Marc MERLIN <marc@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 02:24:03PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > > OK I didn't understand that the problem is with only the sending file
> > > system, not the receive file system. And also it sounds like the send
> > > did not cause the problem, but it's somehow a pre-existing problem
> > > that --repair isn't completely fixing up, or maybe is making different
> > > (or worse).
> >
> > Correct on all points.
> >
> > > So I guess the real question is what happened to this file system
> > > before the send, that got it into this weird state.
> >
> > That too, but honestly there are a lot of variables, and it feels like a
> > bit of wild goose chase.
>
> Maybe. The story arc on Btrfs is that check --repair only fixes the
> things it knows how to fix. It's gotten better but still has the scary
> warning, and lately has a 10 second delay to really make sure the user
> meant to use it. And regardless of mode, it's slow and just can't
> scale. Neither does "wipe and restore from backup". So the problems of
> inconsistency need to be understood to avoid the problem in the first
> place.
>
>
> >
> > Basically it looked like the issues with the FS are pretty minor (I was
> > able to cp -av the entire data without any file error), but that btrfs
> > check --repair is unable to make it right, which will likely force me to
> > wipe and restore.
> > I know chedk is WIP, and that's why I'm providing feedback :)
>
> What about finding inode 14058737 and deleting it? In all of the
> listed subvolumes? And then unmount and check again?


Before deleting it, can you check if chattr +C is set? Or what kind of
file is this? Because there's an old loophole in older kernels where
chattr +C could be set, but if defragmented while mounted with a
compression option, it would get compressed. And btrfs check complains
about it, but it's not actually a problem. Newer kernels don't do this
but I'm not certain about the send error's relationship with this.

You could try just making a 'cp --reflink=never' copy of the file. And
delete the original (and all of its copies in all subvolumes). Now
'btrfs check'.


-- 
Chris Murphy



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux