Skip to content

Add support for resizing BTRFS based images#194

Merged
guysoft merged 2 commits intoguysoft:develfrom
dirkhh:addBtrfsSupport
Apr 24, 2023
Merged

Add support for resizing BTRFS based images#194
guysoft merged 2 commits intoguysoft:develfrom
dirkhh:addBtrfsSupport

Conversation

@dirkhh
Copy link
Contributor

@dirkhh dirkhh commented Apr 21, 2023

The assumption that all SBC images use ext[234] seems a bit overly simplistic. This adds a simple check to make sure we are actually dealing with an extN filesystem before running fsck against it.

Next it adds an attempt to handle BTRFS file systems. This is a bit challenging since BTRFS needs to be online in order to be resized (how odd is that?) and it seemed that mounting the filesystem at times failed for strange reasons - which resulted in the hacky code that attempts to unmount the loop device (even though it clearly isn't mounted) and listing the content of the freshly created temporary mount point. This seems pointless, but with those two lines in place I no longer got the mount failures.

dirkhh added 2 commits April 21, 2023 14:38
@dirkhh
Add support for resizing BTRFS based images
06d9bdb 
The assumption that all SBC images use ext[234] seems a bit overly
simplistic. This adds a simple check to make sure we are actually
dealing with an extN filesystem before running fsck against it.

Next it adds an attempt to handle BTRFS file systems. This is a bit
challenging since BTRFS needs to be online in order to be resized
(how odd is that?) and it seemed that mounting the filesystem at times
failed for strange reasons - which resulted in the hacky code that
attempts to unmount the loop device (even though it clearly isn't
mounted) and listing the content of the freshly created temporary mount
point. This seems pointless, but with those two lines in place I no
longer got the mount failures.

Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
@dirkhh
add /proc for images that miss that
cbaf2cf 
Seems rather odd, but I encounter this eith an OrangePi5 image.

Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
@guysoft
Copy link
Owner

guysoft commented Apr 24, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Hey @dirkhh thanks for your contribution!
Indeed there seem to be more SBCs coming along using btrfs and I actually had this on my list to support @libre-computer-project
CC @meteyou if you have the time to test it would be great :)

@dirkhh if you want you can also PR an entry for adsb-feeder-image to: https://github.com/guysoft/CustomPiOS#list-of-distributions-using-custompios
Its pretty cool!
Can also be added to: https://github.com/guysoft/pi-imager via https://github.com/guysoft/pi-imager-web/

@guysoft guysoft merged commit a6f108f into guysoft:devel Apr 24, 2023
@meteyou
Copy link
Contributor

meteyou commented Apr 24, 2023

@guysoft thx for the ping. We will test it, as soon as possible.

@sunefred sunefred mentioned this pull request Apr 25, 2023
Closed
guysoft added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 25, 2023
@guysoft
Add file as a dependency due to #194 , should fix #195
11023e5
@guysoft
Copy link
Owner

guysoft commented Apr 25, 2023

Heads up, looks like file is now a dependency due to this change

@KwadFan
Copy link
Contributor

KwadFan commented May 11, 2023

Here is a test of these changes.

It fails dring resizing the final image. Maybe we could add something to BASE Module to skip resizing?

mainsail-crew/MainsailOS#223 (comment)

@guysoft
Copy link
Owner

guysoft commented May 11, 2023 •
edited
Loading

The PR should support resizing AFAIK. see:
https://github.com/guysoft/CustomPiOS/pull/194/files#diff-237c21469b21016651ddcc1945c8cb58e320139ec48ffdb81f991edcb795b08aR309

The line (and functions) that need to be fixed are:
https://github.com/guysoft/CustomPiOS/blob/devel/src/common.sh#L407

@dirkhh are you using these functions or did you do some change so your images build?

Error for reference from that build (they get deleted):

+++ minimize_ext 2022-09-22-raspbian-bullseye-arm64-lite+aml-s905x-cc.img 2 600
+++ image=2022-09-22-raspbian-bullseye-arm64-lite+aml-s905x-cc.img
+++ partition=2
+++ buffer=600
+++ echo 'Resizing partition 2 on 2022-09-22-raspbian-bullseye-arm64-lite+aml-s905x-cc.img to minimal size + 600 MB'
Resizing partition 2 on 2022-09-22-raspbian-bullseye-arm64-lite+aml-s905x-cc.img to minimal size + 600 MB
++++ sfdisk --json 2022-09-22-raspbian-bullseye-arm64-lite+aml-s905x-cc.img
+++ fdisk_output='{
   "partitiontable": {
      "label": "dos",
      "id": "0x21e60f8c",
      "device": "2022-09-22-raspbian-bullseye-arm64-lite+aml-s905x-cc.img",
      "unit": "sectors",
      "sectorsize": 512,
      "partitions": [
         {
            "node": "2022-09-22-raspbian-bullseye-arm64-lite+aml-s905x-cc.img1",
            "start": 8192,
            "size": 524288,
            "type": "c"
         },{
            "node": "2022-09-22-raspbian-bullseye-arm64-lite+aml-s905x-cc.img2",
            "start": 532480,
            "size": 12582912,
            "type": "83"
         }
      ]
   }
}'
++++ jq '.partitiontable.partitions[] | select(.node == "2022-09-22-raspbian-bullseye-arm64-lite+aml-s905x-cc.img2").start'
+++ start=532480
++++ jq '.partitiontable.partitions[] | select(.node == "2022-09-22-raspbian-bullseye-arm64-lite+aml-s905x-cc.img2").size'
+++ e2fsize_blocks=12582912
+++ offset=272629760
+++ detach_all_loopback 2022-09-22-raspbian-bullseye-arm64-lite+aml-s905x-cc.img
++++ losetup
++++ grep 2022-09-22-raspbian-bullseye-arm64-lite+aml-s905x-cc.img
++++ awk '{ print $1 }'
+++ test_for_image 2022-09-22-raspbian-bullseye-arm64-lite+aml-s905x-cc.img
+++ '[' '!' -f 2022-09-22-raspbian-bullseye-arm64-lite+aml-s905x-cc.img ']'
++++ losetup -f --show -o 272629760 2022-09-22-raspbian-bullseye-arm64-lite+aml-s905x-cc.img
+++ LODEV=/dev/loop3
+++ trap 'losetup -d $LODEV' EXIT
+++ e2fsck -fy /dev/loop3
e2fsck 1.46.5 (30-Dec-2021)
ext2fs_open2: Bad magic number in super-block
e2fsck: Superblock invalid, trying backup blocks...
e2fsck: Bad magic number in super-block while trying to open /dev/loop3

The superblock could not be read or does not describe a valid ext2/ext3/ext4
filesystem.  If the device is valid and it really contains an ext2/ext3/ext4
filesystem (and not swap or ufs or something else), then the superblock
is corrupt, and you might try running e2fsck with an alternate superblock:
    e2fsck -b 8193 <device>
 or
    e2fsck -b 32768 <device>

/dev/loop3 contains a btrfs file system labelled 'rootfs'
++ losetup -d /dev/loop3
+ exit 8

@dirkhh
Copy link
Contributor Author

dirkhh commented May 11, 2023

The PR should support resizing AFAIK. see: https://github.com/guysoft/CustomPiOS/pull/194/files#diff-237c21469b21016651ddcc1945c8cb58e320139ec48ffdb81f991edcb795b08aR309

The line (and functions) that need to be fixed are: https://github.com/guysoft/CustomPiOS/blob/devel/src/common.sh#L407

@dirkhh are you using these functions or did you do some change so your images build?

Error for reference from that build (they get deleted):
+++ e2fsck -fy /dev/loop3
e2fsck 1.46.5 (30-Dec-2021)
ext2fs_open2: Bad magic number in super-block
e2fsck: Superblock invalid, trying backup blocks...
e2fsck: Bad magic number in super-block while trying to open /dev/loop3

Yes I do.
Don't try to use the ext-fs fsck on btrfs (or other filesystems).
Just check that it's the right filesystem before running this.

@KwadFan
Copy link
Contributor

KwadFan commented May 11, 2023

How do I skip it then? I have to resize it on build start, but func minimize_ext is invoked by default^^

guysoft added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 8, 2023
@guysoft
Add btrfs build tools #195 #194
0c67ba1
guysoft added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 9, 2023
@guysoft
Dont run minimize_ext on btrfs, unimplmented for btrfs for now #195 #194
7180031
guysoft added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 9, 2023
@guysoft
Remove osetup -d, already happends with trap #195 #194
e732a63
@guysoft
Copy link
Owner

guysoft commented Jun 11, 2023

BTRFS works now but does not resize correctly

@guysoft guysoft mentioned this pull request Dec 16, 2025
Open
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@dirkhh @guysoft @meteyou @KwadFan