Re: kernel incompatibility?

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

 



On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 03:55:02PM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 16, 2020 at 2:25 AM Simeon Felis <simeon_btrfs@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I had a btrfs raid1 running on raspbian (linux 4.19 arm) which
> > overheated.  To fix corruptions I attached the raid1 on my workstation
> > (linux 5.5 x86_64) and performed scrub, defrag and --full-balance (not
> > necessarily in this order) and fixed the corruptions.
> >
> > Back on raspbian a mount fails:
> >
> > root@omv:~# mount /dev/disk/by-label/URAID /mnt/URAID/
> > mount: /mnt/URAID: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/sda1, missing codepage or helper program, or other error.
> > [   27.304203] BTRFS critical (device sda1): unable to find logical 4306137776128 length 4096

> Because you get this on 4.19.97 (which is the latest kernel on Arch
> for ARM v7l), but it mounts OK on 5.5 on x86_64, I'm suspicious it's
> an arch specific bug. I don't offhand see any applicable updates
> through 4.19.103 that would fix this problem.

In particular, you have a filesystem 8TB in size on a 32-bit machine.
That's just below the limit of brokenness.  If the balance allocated
enough new logical addresses...

On the other hand, the addresses mentioned here are just below 4TB.


Meow!
-- 
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Remember, the S in "IoT" stands for Security, while P stands
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ for Privacy.
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀



[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