Comment # 11 on bug 1043912 from Frederic Crozat

(In reply to Nikolay Borisov from comment #10)
> Right, then it's apparent why it doesn't want to mount - the check which
> fails the mount was not present until rpm-4.4.63-1. It's only a consistency
> check. However, the more pressing question the volume got in a situation
> where device size doesn't equal to what is recorded in the superblock. I
> guess there are 2 courses of action: 
> 
> 1) Revert the offending patch, but it's supposed to harden the the kernel
> against such "corruption" ( the quotes are due to my not being sure that
> it's actually a corruption)

Would a online resize of the FS be enough to "fix" the issue ?

> 2) If you have enough freespace on a different drive, try to recreate the
> filesystem via btrfs send/receive. Obviously this might work in your case
> but we don't know how widespread this bug could be, it seems so far no one
> has complained. 

I'm really concern we might see this from our SP2 customers at some point as L3
(we never know when they will apply maintenance update)..


> David, Jeff what do you make out of this ?