On 22/02/2021 21:07, Steven Davies wrote:

[+CC Anand ]

Booted my system with kernel 5.11.0 vanilla with the first time and received this:

BTRFS info (device nvme0n1p2): has skinny extents
BTRFS error (device nvme0n1p2): device total_bytes should be at most 964757028864 but found 
964770336768
BTRFS error (device nvme0n1p2): failed to read chunk tree: -22

Booting with 5.10.12 has no issues.

# btrfs filesystem usage /
Overall:
     Device size:                 898.51GiB
     Device allocated:            620.06GiB
     Device unallocated:          278.45GiB
     Device missing:                  0.00B
     Used:                        616.58GiB
     Free (estimated):            279.94GiB      (min: 140.72GiB)
     Data ratio:                       1.00
     Metadata ratio:                   2.00
     Global reserve:              512.00MiB      (used: 0.00B)

Data,single: Size:568.00GiB, Used:566.51GiB (99.74%)
    /dev/nvme0n1p2        568.00GiB

Metadata,DUP: Size:26.00GiB, Used:25.03GiB (96.29%)
    /dev/nvme0n1p2         52.00GiB

System,DUP: Size:32.00MiB, Used:80.00KiB (0.24%)
    /dev/nvme0n1p2         64.00MiB

Unallocated:
    /dev/nvme0n1p2        278.45GiB

# parted -l
Model: Sabrent Rocket Q (nvme)
Disk /dev/nvme0n1: 1000GB
Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B
Partition Table: gpt
Disk Flags:

Number  Start   End     Size    File system     Name  Flags
  1      1049kB  1075MB  1074MB  fat32                 boot, esp
  2      1075MB  966GB   965GB   btrfs
  3      966GB   1000GB  34.4GB  linux-swap(v1)        swap

What has changed in 5.11 which might cause this?

This line:

BTRFS info (device nvme0n1p2): has skinny extents
BTRFS error (device nvme0n1p2): device total_bytes should be at most 964757028864 but found 
964770336768
BTRFS error (device nvme0n1p2): failed to read chunk tree: -22

comes from 3a160a933111 ("btrfs: drop never met disk total bytes check in verify_one_dev_extent")
which went into v5.11-rc1.

IIUIC the device item's total_bytes and the block device inode's size are off by 12M, so the check
introduced in the above commit refuses to mount the FS.

Anand any idea?

Byte,
	Johannes