From: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
To: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de>
Cc: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>,
Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@suse.com>,
quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com, anand.jain@oracle.com, rbrown@suse.de,
Linux BTRFS Mailinglist <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] btrfs-progs: warn users about the possible dangers of check --repair
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2019 17:22:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191021152241.GN3001@twin.jikos.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191018111604.16463-1-jthumshirn@suse.de>
On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 01:16:03PM +0200, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> The manual page of btrfsck clearly states 'btrfs check --repair' is a
> dangerous operation.
>
> Although this warning is in place users do not read the manual page and/or
> are used to the behaviour of fsck utilities which repair the filesystem,
> and thus potentially cause harm.
>
> Similar to 'btrfs balance' without any filters, add a warning and a
> countdown, so users can bail out before eventual corrupting the filesystem
> more than it already is.
>
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de>
>
> ---
> Changes to v1:
> - Fix grammar mistakes in warning message
> - Skip delay with --force
--force was added for a different reason, to allow check on a mounted
filesystem. I don't think that combining --repair and --force just to
allow repair is a good idea. There's a 'dangerous repair' mode for eg.
xfs that allows to do live surgery on a mounted filesytem (followed by
immediate reboot). We want to be able to do that eventually.
I understand where the motivation comes from, let me have a second
thought on that.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-21 15:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-18 11:16 [PATCH v2 1/2] btrfs-progs: warn users about the possible dangers of check --repair Johannes Thumshirn
2019-10-18 11:16 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] btrfs-progs: docs: fix warning test Johannes Thumshirn
2019-10-21 15:22 ` David Sterba [this message]
2019-10-22 7:33 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] btrfs-progs: warn users about the possible dangers of check --repair Johannes Thumshirn
2019-10-22 7:37 ` Qu Wenruo
2019-10-22 7:45 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2019-10-22 7:50 ` Nikolay Borisov
2019-10-22 12:19 ` David Sterba
2019-11-15 12:53 ` David Sterba
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20191021152241.GN3001@twin.jikos.cz \
--to=dsterba@suse.cz \
--cc=anand.jain@oracle.com \
--cc=dsterba@suse.com \
--cc=jthumshirn@suse.de \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nborisov@suse.com \
--cc=quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com \
--cc=rbrown@suse.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).