Re: [PATCH 0/4] Better btrfsck tree corruption report and automatic csum tree rebuild.

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

 



On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 10:04:43AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> Although btrfsck can rebuild the csum tree, but has the following
> problems for end users or sysadmins who is not familiar with btrfs.
> 1) No brief info on which tree is corrupted.
>    In fact, after extent and chunk tree check, we iterate all the
>    extents and should have a brief view about which tree is corrupted.
>    We can info user the fact to give them a clear view about what to do
>    next
> 
> 2) No automatically csum tree rebuild.
>    If btrfsck can rebuild csum tree when needed and possible, why not
>    rebuild it?

> This patchset handles this 2 problems:
> Patch 1 will handle problem 1) and patch 2~3) to handle problem 2).
> Now csum tree will be automatically rebuilt if and only if csum tree is
> broken but all other tree is OK.

I don't agree here, rebuilding the csum tree should be user's decision.
Point 1) is good, giving more information to the user certainly helps to
make that decision.
--
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




[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