Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 26 Dec 2022 14:37:19 +0100 | Subject | Re: [6.2][regression] after commit 947a629988f191807d2d22ba63ae18259bb645c5 btrfs volume periodical forced switch to readonly after a lot of disk writes #forregzbot | From | Thorsten Leemhuis <> |
| |
[Note: this mail contains only information for Linux kernel regression tracking. Mails like these contain '#forregzbot' in the subject to make then easy to spot and filter out. The author also tried to remove most or all individuals from the list of recipients to spare them the hassle.]
On 25.12.22 22:32, Mikhail Gavrilov wrote: > Hi, > It is curious but it happens only on machine which have BTRFS volume > combined from two high speed nvme (pcie 4) SSD in RAID 0. On machines > with BTRFS volume from one HDD the bug does not appear. > > To bisect the problematic commit, I had to sweat a lot. At each step, > I downloaded the 150 GB game "Assassin's Creed Valhalla" 4 times and > deleted it. For make sure that the commit previous to > 947a629988f191807d2d22ba63ae18259bb645c5 is definitely not affected by > the bug, I downloaded this game 10 times, which should have provided > more than 1.5 Tb of data writing to the btrfs volume. > > Here is result of my bisection: > 947a629988f191807d2d22ba63ae18259bb645c5 is the first bad commit > [...] > Before going to readonly, the preceding line in kernel log display a message: > [ 1908.029663] BTRFS: error (device nvme0n1p3: state A) in > btrfs_run_delayed_refs:2147: errno=-5 IO failure > > I also attached a full kernel log.
Thanks for the report. To be sure below issue doesn't fall through the cracks unnoticed, I'm adding it to regzbot, my Linux kernel regression tracking bot:
#regzbot ^introduced 947a629988f191807d2d22ba63ae18259bb64 #regzbot title btrfs: volume periodical forced switch to readonly after a lot of disk writes #regzbot ignore-activity
Ciao, Thorsten (wearing his 'the Linux kernel's regression tracker' hat)
P.S.: As the Linux kernel's regression tracker I deal with a lot of reports and sometimes miss something important when writing mails like this. If that's the case here, don't hesitate to tell me in a public reply, it's in everyone's interest to set the public record straight.
| |