Bug 1017808

Summary:	'too much hardlinks' error
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Enrico Scholz <rh-bugzilla>
Component:	btrfs-progs	Assignee:	Eric Sandeen <esandeen>
Status:	CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	19	CC:	esandeen, josef, mmahut
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2014-05-14 16:04:44 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Enrico Scholz 2013-10-10 14:24:58 UTC

Description of problem:

The btrfs filesystems created by mkfs.btrfs are hitting EMLINK errors with low counts of links:

 $ cd <btrfs-directory>
 $ echo x > <M-250>x            # M-250 means, pressing meta key + entering 250
 $ for i in `seq 0 14`; do ln -f *x <M-250>x$i; done
 ln: failed to create hard link to 'xx...': Too many links

I am aware that btrfs had a very low hard link limit but afaik it was removed in kernel 3.7 by introducing extended inode refs.

I tried 'btrfstune -r' and 'btrfstune -x' on the filesystem but problem still remains.


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

btrfs-progs-0.20.rc1.20130917git194aa4a-1.fc19.x86_64
kernel-3.11.2-201.fc19.x86_64


How reproducible:

100%

Comment 1 Eric Sandeen 2013-11-14 19:32:03 UTC

This is a mass update of F19 and F20 btrfs-progs bugs.

A btrfs-progs git snapshot has been built in Rawhide and submitted for F19 and F20 testing.

If your bug was reproducible, please re-test with the new build, and update this bug to let us know if it's been resolved.  If so I can add it to the Bodhi errata.

Thanks,
-Eric

Comment 2 Eric Sandeen 2014-05-13 16:39:08 UTC

btrfs-progs-3.14.1 has been pushed to Fedora 19 and 20 for testing.

I frankly have no idea if this will resolve your bug or not, but if you test it and find that it does, please take the opportunity to close this bug.  :)

Thanks,
-Eric

Comment 3 Eric Sandeen 2014-05-14 16:04:44 UTC

This all works upstream, as far as I know.  If not, feel free to re-open with current version details.

-Eric