From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39B25C432C0 for ; Wed, 27 Nov 2019 06:09:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED2D8206F0 for ; Wed, 27 Nov 2019 06:09:33 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=inwind.it header.i=@inwind.it header.b="EpOkURWo" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726673AbfK0GJd (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Nov 2019 01:09:33 -0500 Received: from smtp-35.italiaonline.it ([213.209.10.35]:54934 "EHLO libero.it" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726112AbfK0GJc (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Nov 2019 01:09:32 -0500 Received: from venice.bhome ([94.37.221.184]) by smtp-35.iol.local with ESMTPA id ZqW2i7bLv4KqMZqW2iJV2a; Wed, 27 Nov 2019 07:09:30 +0100 x-libjamoibt: 1601 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=inwind.it; s=s2014; t=1574834970; bh=tmegjrh3JH04mkv2QifkC5biZLDK/U42S8Wb1QhTesI=; h=Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=EpOkURWohOg8L/7j3v9+scUJbQFjd9YkVdsD8RPFU22oUqRPec15/60p7jGx02uPA qR3m3k7ibrizOb4xDV1RPaFO+j1Bmw2g/7smBcq85WQ5NRM1313IKnoSxnf8nQ7D8y 6YuJXdtQh6PvepkfkBPLZLcUAoV2x16xhrP9kOxpYJ6pUxD8uLKnpb+CjX2AEK3wQO u1wICRv98CP9HyOneBGmpJ7mY6SfjLAKNsxzL49m7hP6WGT+SorkFv/RuT0Bg6YBie BQzOa1zcoRlLA91FPqHEzwxq1aKxqTftgJn/R/wB1+su42sv7awNWRaA+9F4DhRFKa wCjcHBF7tKHcg== X-CNFS-Analysis: v=2.3 cv=UdUvt5aN c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=effWHHp4iGaMry7csNPTyg==:117 a=effWHHp4iGaMry7csNPTyg==:17 a=jpOVt7BSZ2e4Z31A5e1TngXxSK0=:19 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=doPC0QqkYbtJk2A2XCYA:9 a=0Jns2jzslF4hp9Ig:21 a=ZFn7A5CI2fFgbM74:21 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 Reply-To: kreijack@inwind.it Subject: Re: GRUB bug with Btrfs multiple devices To: Chris Murphy Cc: Btrfs BTRFS References: From: Goffredo Baroncelli Message-ID: <1853071f-bbe9-da23-8b42-ccf46db995f8@inwind.it> Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 07:09:30 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.2.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfLiPOeMKfR8fKxD5wudJ+qgLTWQQo/2UZAQpLsKa6gXmSTYzWysNmzy3Q68mMcXXmMh2J6/pjy/sTqHjE3unuw4ZcLJREDTfPuItZqJFkAJxi5PtvT/9 Hf6m5gHcyzi2IRTD3hGA3QYtUd+aRC+wt02UG0rFJZ8z0ZOcZfJovs8Aaax3xOzgEKLVT1kriv2eJfWdGV/HUA41zhgvDuXDBhU= Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org On 27/11/2019 00.53, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 2:11 PM Goffredo Baroncelli wrote: >> >> On 26/11/2019 05.05, Chris Murphy wrote: >>> grub2-efi-x64-2.02-100.fc31.x86_64 >>> kernel-5.3.13-300.fc31.x86_64 >>> >>> I've seen this before, so it isn't a regression in either of the above >>> versions. But I'm also not certain when the regression occurred, >>> because the last time I tested Btrfs multiple devices (specifically >>> data single profile), was years ago and I didn't run into this. >> >> From the video, it seems that GRUB complaints about a "failure reading". However GRUB is capable to perform the boot and because the profiles are "single (no redundancy), it seems a "false positive" error. >> >> When I added the RADID5/6 support to grub, I remember errors like what you showed. However it happened 1 year ago, so my remember may be wrong. >> I noticed that GRUB test a lot of disks (hd0 ... hd3) . Could you be so kindly to share the disks layout ? Most error is something like "failure reading sector 0xXX". However I can't read the XX number: could you be so kindly to tell us which number is "XX" ? It seems 0x80... but my eyes are bad and your video is even worse :-) > > It was a dark room and shaky cam was seeking for focus :-D It's 0x80. > > The storage is one CD-ROM drive and one SSD drive. That's it. So I > don't know why there's hd2 and hd3, it seems like GRUB is confused > about how many drives there are, but that pre-dates this problem. If these drives are phantom ones, these could be the root of the problem... > > >> I think that the errors is due to the "rescan" logic (see grub commit [1]). Could you try a more recent grub (2.04 instead of 2.02) ? > > Yes Fedora Rawhide has 2.04 in it, so I'll give that a shot next time > I rebuild this particular laptop, which should be relatively soon; or > even maybe I can reproduce this problem in a VM with two virtio > devices. > > -- gpg @keyserver.linux.it: Goffredo Baroncelli Key fingerprint BBF5 1610 0B64 DAC6 5F7D 17B2 0EDA 9B37 8B82 E0B5