From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2297E13832E for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2016 13:38:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CFDD721C03E; Thu, 18 Aug 2016 13:38:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qk0-f196.google.com (mail-qk0-f196.google.com [209.85.220.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 91FC4E099D for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2016 13:38:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qk0-f196.google.com with SMTP id r128so2359299qkc.1 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2016 06:38:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to; bh=JCTNNZ2GDiuLpj0d8zBFNxkyYb6P+BYHOiF0cXZMSJM=; b=F7XhMmFEXbRJE/1eoTflI87Zc1BlO2kVdxEN6OGqlWvWdxLsoKq7i9xj0tuqKsGwgI druQrUz3hM/NdanBr0ERc8Ao3h144/tUvki0Us5/aRLen7zqlk8BpikDLBN00ohGTE5K D74Gyd7SFzQn62ctLYE7IEBsxPts1gUYUWfFnGcHrgKt5hCqYYjNzMItRYYvE10wHtYf 7KfFKIFZ/wJimCOVCo9QhKkQOEfZ91tMiZPiK+J5l1vtC3YHtj9XOT2jqvoJOsRg/MYX 6YQjc9IE+tBmQl/s7BB7opDU5FFImZTBgN9nFwMkd4ZzEH7coDC5W+QQabgimt1MfBhc ScWQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to; bh=JCTNNZ2GDiuLpj0d8zBFNxkyYb6P+BYHOiF0cXZMSJM=; b=i42l1YBEESjFBvGt0+yQw4a7SmhQrLsCspHzMhjeHhFgVSZcCxCJ/jN5N4DgYx9B5S 83ngUJ8xfrlZ5gDYet/YFmEiQP2d0t/4CgARHSi/UTCu7fH3+UhAwp9fnNdEBwRlk08t N0ZeY3bmH+VxDOWcTm30/v+s5DQeZsAWYWUUk6c3YpAbARCVqQJLIWQtcsxLjZ+k3r0l k7Zctj6iU86XrjcY7yiOSjGB5rSWfJUMhXSyae2p3SJLcNMljSUCsFIcq4CzZhdqar4Q LCsxE0nHnGmDTONV7BtEuQt7CNVW6m8ZdeodZzLSPpH2n+QKcESLH/Ufk0RbzRKQ4WAV hiYw== X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoout5vZcwNJQPBc8zmsiKuJQCe+7sFGeHbm4RSExkhGSfJhMZlTZRRuq/eGnGoJoCZHYmzF8OoHjuFZN7xA== X-Received: by 10.55.215.152 with SMTP id t24mr2350813qkt.268.1471527484378; Thu, 18 Aug 2016 06:38:04 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.140.40.36 with HTTP; Thu, 18 Aug 2016 06:38:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <2035119.Y6fIYWEQZY@andromeda> References: <20160817232613.47d780b3@digimed.co.uk> <2035119.Y6fIYWEQZY@andromeda> From: Rich Freeman Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 09:38:03 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: qF05mNCG4IJbNpEwJGpVwYv2AG4 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Can't create valid btrfs on NVMe To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: 33685877-a90e-44b1-b27c-c478f86b63a4 X-Archives-Hash: c1f31ff8cc6171935ffd023c31f87e27 On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 8:57 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote: > On Wednesday, August 17, 2016 11:26:13 PM Neil Bothwick wrote: >> I'm putting together a new desktop using a Samsung SM951 NVMe drive. I >> booted sysrescd, partitioned the drive and ran >> >> mkfs.btrfs /dev/nvme0n1p3 >> mount /dev/nvme0n1p3 /mnt/custom >> >> df -T, mount and findmnt all show this is mounted as a btrfs filesystem, >> e.g. >> >> /dev/nvme0n1p3 on /mnt/custom type btrfs (rw,relatime,ssd,space_cache) >> >> I can create files in here but cannot do anything btrfs-y >> >> % btrfs filesystem show /mnt/custom >> ERROR: not a valid btrfs filesystem: /mnt/custom >> >> % btrfs subvolume create /mnt/custom/test >> Create subvolume '/mnt/custom/test' >> ERROR: cannot create subvolume: Inappropriate ioctl for device >> >> Google has been no help at all. > > I've got a similar drive in my desktop and it actually works. > Difference: I am using Ext4. > > Can you try Ext4 and see if it works? > Next test: Does it work with a non-NVMe drive? > > Also, which kernel version? I think you guys are going down the wrong road. The kernel drivers are almost certainly working for the drive, otherwise the filesystem wouldn't work at all, and I'm sure a million ext4 users would have noticed a problem by now. This is almost certainly a bug in btrfs-progs, or maybe the btrfs filesystem driver in the kernel. I'd suggest raising this on the btrfs mailing list, where it is going to get a lot more attention from the people who develop btrfs. There are a few of us who use it around here, but I'd have to spend a day tweaking the btrfs-progs source to have a guess at where this is bailing out. I suspect somebody over there would have an answer almost immediately. -- Rich