Btrfsck errors (fs tree 565 refs 125 not found) - how serious

Btrfsck errors (fs tree 565 refs 125 not found) - how serious

[Clemens Eisserer]

Hi,

For about 3 weeks I've been using btrfs on my desktop machine, using
the snapshot-functionality quite a lot.

Today I ran btrfsck and got about ~10MB of output which looks like:

fs tree 565 refs 125 not found
	unresolved ref root 807 dir 813347 index 277 namelen 39 name
snapshot_1368273601_2013-05-11_14:00:01 error 600
	unresolved ref root 808 dir 813347 index 277 namelen 39 name
snapshot_1368273601_2013-05-11_14:00:01 error 600
.......

fs tree 566 refs 125 not found
	unresolved ref root 807 dir 813347 index 278 namelen 39 name
snapshot_1368274201_2013-05-11_14:10:01 error 600
	unresolved ref root 808 dir 813347 index 278 namelen 39 name
snapshot_1368274201_2013-05-11_14:10:01 error 600
......


while the log contained a lot of different values for "fs tree", the
refs which were not found stays fairly constant:

refs: 125, 397, 398, 406, 407, 420

How serious are those issues, should I be worried?
Would it help if I find ways to reproduce this behaviour on a fresh
btrfs filesystem?

Thank you in advance, Clemens

Re: Btrfsck errors (fs tree 565 refs 125 not found) - how serious

[Clemens Eisserer]

Hi again,

I am able to induce the btrfsck errors I experienced using a synthetic
workload on a fresh filesystem with linux-3.10.0.rc2.
However as filing the bug-report would take quite some time (uploading
512mb trace-files, writing a short read-me, ...) I wonder whether this
is an issue woth of reporting, or maybe just caused by an outdated
version of btrfsck (I am using
btrfs-progs-0.20.rc1.20130308git704a08c-1).

Regards, Clemens

> fs tree 565 refs 125 not found
>         unresolved ref root 807 dir 813347 index 277 namelen 39 name
> snapshot_1368273601_2013-05-11_14:00:01 error 600
  ......

Re: Btrfsck errors (fs tree 565 refs 125 not found) - how serious

[Josef Bacik]

On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 12:06:50PM -0600, Clemens Eisserer wrote:
> Hi again,
> 
> I am able to induce the btrfsck errors I experienced using a synthetic
> workload on a fresh filesystem with linux-3.10.0.rc2.
> However as filing the bug-report would take quite some time (uploading
> 512mb trace-files, writing a short read-me, ...) I wonder whether this
> is an issue woth of reporting, or maybe just caused by an outdated
> version of btrfsck (I am using
> btrfs-progs-0.20.rc1.20130308git704a08c-1).
> 

You are running on an unmounted fs right?  Also please make sure you are running
the git version

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-progs.git

Thanks,

Josef

Re: Btrfsck errors (fs tree 565 refs 125 not found) - how serious

[Clemens Eisserer]

Hi Josef,

> You are running on an unmounted fs right?  Also please make sure you are running
> the git version

Yes, the fs was properly unmounted.

> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-progs.git

I still get those errors, I'll try to file a bug-report with the
tools/data required to reproduce this issue...

Thanks, Clemens

Re: Btrfsck errors (fs tree 565 refs 125 not found) - how serious

[Clemens Eisserer]

Hi,

>> You are running on an unmounted fs right?  Also please make sure you are running
>> the git version
>
> Yes, the fs was properly unmounted.
>
>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-progs.git
>
> I still get those errors, I'll try to file a bug-report with the
> tools/data required to reproduce this issue...

Filed at: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=59051

Regards