Re: interest in post-mortem examination of a BTRFS system and improving the btrfs-code?

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

 



On 4/2/19 4:12 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2019/4/2 下午9:59, Nik. wrote:
>>
>>
>> 2019-04-02 15:24, Qu Wenruo:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2019/4/2 下午9:06, Nik. wrote:
>>>>
>>> If the larger fs really doesn't get any write (btrfs check --repair
>>> failed to open the fs, thus have the output "cannot open file system"),
>>> I'm interesting in that one.
>>
>> This is excerpt from the terminal log:
>> "# btrfs check --readonly /dev/md0
>> incorrect offsets 15003 146075
>> ERROR: cannot open file system
>> #"
> 
> That's great.
> 
> And to my surprise, this is completely different problem.
> 
> And I believe, it will be detected by latest write time tree checker
> patches in next kernel release.
> 
> This problem is normally caused by memory bit flip.

To illustrate for whoever needs it to follow this reasoning:

bin(146075) -> 0b100011101010011011
bin(15003)  ->     0b11101010011011

So, 146075 is actually 15003, but with a bit flipped from 0 to 1.

> This should ring a little alert about the problem.

Hans



[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