On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 11:13 AM, Claes Fransson <claes.v.fransson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I haven't noticed before that there is actually RAM-modules from > different vendors in the laptop. One 8GB by Samsung, and one 4GB by > Kingston! If they have the correct tolerances, I don't think it's a problem. Some memory controllers use a kind of interleaving if the module sizes are the same, so worse case you might be leaving a bit of a performance improvement on the table by the fact they aren't the same size. If the memory testing doesn't pan out, you could go down a bit of a rabbit hole and run each module in production for twice the length of time you figure you should see a corruption appear. > I also found that there indeed was a new firmware version for my > SSD-disk, so I have now updated it's firmware to the newest version. > Unfortunately I couldn't find any information of what possible issues > it was supposed to fix. The laptop has already the latest BIOS version > provided by ASUS for the model. I don't know enough about the bad key ordering error and its cause. If that corruption can happen only in memory then the SSD firmware update may change nothing. If there's some possibility the corruption can be the result of SSD firmware bugs, then it might make sense to use DUP metadata in the short term, even on an SSD. Any memory corruption would affect both copies. Any SSD induced corruption *might* affect both copies, depending on whether the SSD deduplicates or colocates the two copies of metadata...but I'd like to think that there's at least a pretty decent chance one of the copies would be good in which case you'd get Btrfs self-healing for metadata only. Anyway, it's a tedious search. As for Btrfs getting better at handling these kinds of cases. Yeah it's a valid question. What we know about other file systems is they can become unrepairable because they don't detect corruption soon enough. Whereas Btrfs has detected a problem early on yet it's still damaged enough now that effectively you can no longer mount it rw. >From a data integrity point of view, at least you can ro mount and get your data off the volume with a normal file copy operation, not something that's certain with other file systems. If you were to try another file system, I'd look at XFS, tools and kernels in the past couple of years support metadata checksumming with the V5 format. -- Chris Murphy -- 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
