On Wed, August 01, 2012 at 14:02 (+0200), Liu Bo wrote: > On 08/01/2012 07:45 PM, Stefan Behrens wrote: >> With commit acce952b0, btrfs was changed to flag the filesystem with >> BTRFS_SUPER_FLAG_ERROR and switch to read-only mode after a fatal >> error happened like a write I/O errors of all mirrors. >> In such situations, on unmount, the superblock is written in >> btrfs_error_commit_super(). This is done with the intention to be able >> to evaluate the error flag on the next mount. A warning is printed >> in this case during the next mount and the log tree is ignored. >> >> The issue is that it is possible that the superblock points to a root >> that was not written (due to write I/O errors). >> The result is that the filesystem cannot be mounted. btrfsck also does >> not start and all the other btrfs-progs tools fail to start as well. >> However, mount -o recovery is working well and does the right things >> to recover the filesystem (i.e., don't use the log root, clear the >> free space cache and use the next mountable root that is stored in the >> root backup array). >> >> This patch removes the writing of the superblock when >> BTRFS_SUPER_FLAG_ERROR is set, and removes the handling of the error >> flag in the mount function. >> > > Yes, I have to admit that this can be a serious problem. > > But we'll need to send the error flag stored in the super block into > disk in the future so that the next mount can find it unstable and do > fsck by itself maybe. Hum, that's possible. However, I neither see a) a safe way to get that flag to disk nor b) a situation where this flag would help. When we abort a transaction, we just roll everything back to the last commit, i.e. a consistent state. So if we stop writing a potentially corrupt super block, we should be fine anyway. Or am I missing something? -Jan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
