On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 08:16:32AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> > item 27 key (1919785864 DIR_ITEM 2591417872) itemoff 14637 itemsize
> > 46
> > location key (1919805647 INODE_ITEM 0) type FILE
> > transid 2231988 data_len 0 name_len 16
> > name: 1955-capture.jpg
>
> OK, this DIR_ITEM matches with INODE_REF.
> So btrfs-check should only need to insert DIR_INDEX for it.
> >
> >> Although what we could try is to avoid BUG_ON(), but I'm afraid the
> >> problem is more severe than my expectation.
> >
> > How does it look now?
>
> At least we know what btrfs check should do.
> I could dig it a little deeper to see if we could fix it.
> (Or something strange happened again)
Thanks for having had a look, hopefully it helps improving btrfs check,
thanks for getting the info and getting it turned into better code :)
In the meantime this was an easy FS to just wipe and start over with, so
I just did that.
Marc
--
"A mouse is a device used to point at the xterm you want to type in" - A.S.R.
Microsoft is to operating systems ....
.... what McDonalds is to gourmet cooking
Home page: http://marc.merlins.org/ | PGP 1024R/763BE901
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
