From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:63437 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752565AbaFYCRe (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jun 2014 22:17:34 -0400 Message-ID: <53AA313C.9010802@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 21:17:32 -0500 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gui Hecheng , linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] btrfs-progs: fix max mirror number error for chunk-recover References: <1402539901-22779-1-git-send-email-guihc.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> <1402539901-22779-2-git-send-email-guihc.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <1402539901-22779-2-git-send-email-guihc.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 6/11/14, 9:25 PM, Gui Hecheng wrote: > When run chunk-recover on a health btrfs(data profile raid0, with > plenty of data), the program has a chance to abort on the number > of mirrors of an extent. > > According to the kernel code, the max mirror number of an extent > is 3 not 2: > ctree.h: BTRFS_MAX_MIRRORS 3 > chunk-recover.c : BTRFS_NUM_MIRRORS 2 > just change BTRFS_NUM_MIRRORS to 3, and everything goes well. Wouldn't it make a lot more sense, then, to change the userspace macro to be called BTRFS_MAX_MIRRORS as well? -Eric > Signed-off-by: Gui Hecheng > --- > chunk-recover.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/chunk-recover.c b/chunk-recover.c > index 9b46b0b..d5a688e 100644 > --- a/chunk-recover.c > +++ b/chunk-recover.c > @@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ > #include "btrfsck.h" > #include "commands.h" > > -#define BTRFS_NUM_MIRRORS 2 > +#define BTRFS_NUM_MIRRORS 3 > > struct recover_control { > int verbose; >