From e731746a185127663ad71b5ed23036f385ad6d02 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Qu Wenruo Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2019 15:50:58 +0800 Subject: [PATCH] btrfs-progs: Reduce error level from error to warning for OPEN_CTREE_PARTIAL Even if we're using OPEN_CTREE_PARTIAL, like "rescue zero log", the error message still looks too serious even we skipped that tree: bad tree block 2172747776, bytenr mismatch, want=2172747776, have=0 Couldn't setup extent tree ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This patch will change the error message to: - Use error() if we're not using OPEN_CTREE_PARTIAL - Use warning() and explicitly show we're skipping that tree So the result would be something like: For non-OPEN_CTREE_PARTIAL case: bad tree block 2172747776, bytenr mismatch, want=2172747776, have=0 ERROR: could not setup extent tree For OPEN_CTREE_PARTIAL case bad tree block 2172747776, bytenr mismatch, want=2172747776, have=0 WARNING: could not setup extent tree, skipping it Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo Signed-off-by: David Sterba --- disk-io.c | 6 ++++-- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/disk-io.c b/disk-io.c index a5b47b0e..659f8b93 100644 --- a/disk-io.c +++ b/disk-io.c @@ -889,9 +889,11 @@ static int setup_root_or_create_block(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, ret = find_and_setup_root(root, fs_info, objectid, info_root); if (ret) { - printk("Couldn't setup %s tree\n", str); - if (!(flags & OPEN_CTREE_PARTIAL)) + if (!(flags & OPEN_CTREE_PARTIAL)) { + error("could not setup %s tree", str); return -EIO; + } + warning("could not setup %s tree, skipping it", str); /* * Need a blank node here just so we don't screw up in the * million of places that assume a root has a valid ->node