Re: read time tree block corruption detected

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

 



On Sun, Dec 29, 2019 at 9:43 PM Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2019/12/30 下午1:36, Patrick Erley wrote:
> > (ugh, just realized gmail does top replies.  Sorry... will try to
> > figure out how to make gsuite behave like a sane mail client before my
> > next reply):
> >
> > here's btrfs check /dev/nvme0n1p2 (sda3, which is a mirror of it, has
> > exactly the same output)
> >
> > [1/7] checking root items
> > [2/7] checking extents
> > [3/7] checking free space cache
> > [4/7] checking fs roots
> > [5/7] checking only csums items (without verifying data)
> > [6/7] checking root refs
> > [7/7] checking quota groups skipped (not enabled on this FS)
> > Opening filesystem to check...
> > Checking filesystem on /dev/nvme0n1p2
> > UUID: 815266d6-a8b9-4f63-a593-02fde178263f
> > found 89383137280 bytes used, no error found
> > total csum bytes: 85617340
> > total tree bytes: 1670774784
> > total fs tree bytes: 1451180032
> > total extent tree bytes: 107905024
> > btree space waste bytes: 413362851
> > file data blocks allocated: 90769887232
> >  referenced 88836960256
>
> It looks too good to be true, is the btrfs-progs v5.4? IIRC in v5.4 we
> should report inodes generation problems.

Hurray Bottom Reply?

/usr/src/initramfs/bin $ ./btrfs.static --version
btrfs-progs v5.4



[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