Re: Btrfs-progs: allow fsck to fix directory isize errors
Hello, Using checkpatch.pl, i get the following warnings(errors): WARNING: %Ld/%Lu are not-standard C, use %lld/%llu #87: FILE: cmds-check.c:1389: + printf(reset isize for dir %Lu root %Lu\n, rec-ino, total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 141 lines checked patch has style problems, please review. If any of these errors are false positives report them to the maintainer, see CHECKPATCH in MAINTAINERS. Thanks, Wang -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: btrfs-progs: replace fails start but in the background
Hello, Using checkpatch.pl, i get the following warnings(errors): WARNING: please, no space before tabs #83: FILE: utils.c:1999: + * ^Ifrom the user cli like device add remove replace balance etc..$ total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 50 lines checked patch has style problems, please review. If any of these errors are false positives report them to the maintainer, see CHECKPATCH in MAINTAINERS. Thanks, Wang -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Notify caching_thread()s to give up on extent_commit_sem when needed.
Hello, Using checkpatch.pl, i get the following warnings(errors):
WARNING: please, no spaces at the start of a line
#49: FILE: fs/btrfs/ctree.h:1431:
+atomic_t extent_commit_sem_give_up_read;$
WARNING: please, no spaces at the start of a line
#51: FILE: fs/btrfs/ctree.h:1433:
+do { atomic_inc((fs_info)-extent_commit_sem_give_up_read); \$
ERROR: code indent should use tabs where possible
#52: FILE: fs/btrfs/ctree.h:1434:
+ down_write((fs_info)-extent_commit_sem); \$
WARNING: please, no spaces at the start of a line
#52: FILE: fs/btrfs/ctree.h:1434:
+ down_write((fs_info)-extent_commit_sem); \$
ERROR: code indent should use tabs where possible
#53: FILE: fs/btrfs/ctree.h:1435:
+ atomic_dec((fs_info)-extent_commit_sem_give_up_read); \$
WARNING: please, no spaces at the start of a line
#53: FILE: fs/btrfs/ctree.h:1435:
+ atomic_dec((fs_info)-extent_commit_sem_give_up_read); \$
WARNING: please, no spaces at the start of a line
#54: FILE: fs/btrfs/ctree.h:1436:
+} while (0)$
WARNING: please, no spaces at the start of a line
#66: FILE: fs/btrfs/disk-io.c:2294:
+atomic_set(fs_info-extent_commit_sem_give_up_read, 0);$
ERROR: code indent should use tabs where possible
#79: FILE: fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:445:
+if (need_resched() ||$
WARNING: please, no spaces at the start of a line
#79: FILE: fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:445:
+if (need_resched() ||$
ERROR: code indent should use tabs where possible
#80: FILE: fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:446:
+atomic_read(fs_info-extent_commit_sem_give_up_read) 0) {$
WARNING: please, no spaces at the start of a line
#80: FILE: fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:446:
+atomic_read(fs_info-extent_commit_sem_give_up_read) 0) {$
ERROR: patch seems to be corrupt (line wrapped?)
#85: FILE: fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:632:
btrfs_block_group_cache *cache,
WARNING: please, no spaces at the start of a line
#90: FILE: fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:636:
+BTRFS_DOWN_WRITE_EXTENT_COMMIT_SEM(fs_info);$
WARNING: please, no spaces at the start of a line
#100: FILE: fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:5466:
+BTRFS_DOWN_WRITE_EXTENT_COMMIT_SEM(fs_info);$
WARNING: please, no spaces at the start of a line
#109: FILE: fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:8223:
+BTRFS_DOWN_WRITE_EXTENT_COMMIT_SEM(fs_info);$
WARNING: please, no spaces at the start of a line
#123: FILE: fs/btrfs/transaction.c:972:
+BTRFS_DOWN_WRITE_EXTENT_COMMIT_SEM(fs_info);$
total: 5 errors, 12 warnings, 63 lines checked
NOTE: whitespace errors detected, you may wish to use scripts/cleanpatch or
scripts/cleanfile
patch has style problems, please review. If any of these errors
are false positives report them to the maintainer, see
CHECKPATCH in MAINTAINERS.
Thanks, Wang
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Btrfs-progs: setup framework to corrupt specific fields of an inode
Hello, Using checkpatch.pl, i get the following warnings(errors): WARNING: %Ld/%Lu are not-standard C, use %lld/%llu #93: FILE: btrfs-corrupt-block.c:317: + fprintf(stderr, Couldn't find inode %Lu\n, inode); WARNING: %Ld/%Lu are not-standard C, use %lld/%llu #103: FILE: btrfs-corrupt-block.c:327: + fprintf(stderr, Couldn't find inode %Lu\n, inode); total: 0 errors, 2 warnings, 169 lines checked patch has style problems, please review. If any of these errors are false positives report them to the maintainer, see CHECKPATCH in MAINTAINERS. Thanks, Wang -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Btrfs: separate out tests into their own directory V2
Hello, Using checkpatch.pl, i get the following warnings(errors): WARNING: kfree(NULL) is safe this check is probably not required #132: FILE: fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c:3035: + if (map) + kfree(map); WARNING: line over 80 characters #882: FILE: fs/btrfs/tests/free-space-tests.c:211: + ret = test_add_free_space_entry(cache, 4 * 1024 * 1024, 1 * 1024 * 1024, 1); WARNING: line over 80 characters #927: FILE: fs/btrfs/tests/free-space-tests.c:256: + ret = test_add_free_space_entry(cache, 1 * 1024 * 1024, 4 * 1024 * 1024, 1); WARNING: line over 80 characters #947: FILE: fs/btrfs/tests/free-space-tests.c:276: + ret = test_add_free_space_entry(cache, 4 * 1024 * 1024, 4 * 1024 * 1024, 1); WARNING: line over 80 characters #953: FILE: fs/btrfs/tests/free-space-tests.c:282: + ret = test_add_free_space_entry(cache, 2 * 1024 * 1024, 2 * 1024 * 1024, 0); WARNING: line over 80 characters #1016: FILE: fs/btrfs/tests/free-space-tests.c:345: + ret = test_add_free_space_entry(cache, 1 * 1024 * 1024, 2 * 1024 * 1024, 1); WARNING: line over 80 characters #1022: FILE: fs/btrfs/tests/free-space-tests.c:351: + ret = test_add_free_space_entry(cache, 3 * 1024 * 1024, 1 * 1024 * 1024, 0); WARNING: line over 80 characters #1030: FILE: fs/btrfs/tests/free-space-tests.c:359: + test_msg(Error removing bitmap and extent overlapping %d\n, ret); total: 0 errors, 8 warnings, 997 lines checked patch has style problems, please review. If any of these errors are false positives report them to the maintainer, see CHECKPATCH in MAINTAINERS. Thanks, Wang -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: rwsem: add rwsem_is_contended
Hello, Using checkpatch.pl, i get the following warnings(errors): WARNING: EXPORT_SYMBOL(foo); should immediately follow its function/variable #70: FILE: lib/rwsem.c:306: +EXPORT_SYMBOL(rwsem_is_contended); total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 30 lines checked patch has style problems, please review. If any of these errors are false positives report them to the maintainer, see CHECKPATCH in MAINTAINERS. Thanks, Wang -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: btrfs-progs: v3, move out print in cmd_df to another function
Hello, Using checkpatch.pl, i get the following warnings(errors): ERROR: foo * bar should be foo *bar #37: FILE: cmds-filesystem.c:47: +static char * group_type_str(u64 flag) ERROR: foo * bar should be foo *bar #69: FILE: cmds-filesystem.c:63: +static char * group_profile_str(u64 flag) total: 2 errors, 0 warnings, 229 lines checked patch has style problems, please review. If any of these errors are false positives report them to the maintainer, see CHECKPATCH in MAINTAINERS. Thanks, Wang -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH v6] Btrfs: optimize key searches in btrfs_search_slot
On sat, 31 Aug 2013 13:54:56 +0100, Filipe David Borba Manana wrote:
When the binary search returns 0 (exact match), the target key
will necessarily be at slot 0 of all nodes below the current one,
so in this case the binary search is not needed because it will
always return 0, and we waste time doing it, holding node locks
for longer than necessary, etc.
Below follow histograms with the times spent on the current approach of
doing a binary search when the previous binary search returned 0, and
times for the new approach, which directly picks the first item/child
node in the leaf/node.
Current approach:
Count: 6682
Range: 35.000 - 8370.000; Mean: 85.837; Median: 75.000; Stddev: 106.429
Percentiles: 90th: 124.000; 95th: 145.000; 99th: 206.000
35.000 - 61.080: 1235
61.080 - 106.053: 4207
#
106.053 - 183.606: 1122 ##
183.606 - 317.341: 111 #
317.341 - 547.959: 6 |
547.959 - 8370.000: 1 |
Approach proposed by this patch:
Count: 6682
Range: 6.000 - 135.000; Mean: 16.690; Median: 16.000; Stddev: 7.160
Percentiles: 90th: 23.000; 95th: 27.000; 99th: 40.000
6.000 -8.418:58 #
8.418 - 11.670: 1149 #
11.670 - 16.046: 2418
#
16.046 - 21.934: 2098 ##
21.934 - 29.854: 744
29.854 - 40.511: 154 ###
40.511 - 54.848:41 #
54.848 - 74.136: 5 |
74.136 - 100.087: 9 |
100.087 - 135.000: 6 |
These samples were captured during a run of the btrfs tests 001, 002 and
004 in the xfstests, with a leaf/node size of 4Kb.
Signed-off-by: Filipe David Borba Manana fdman...@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik jba...@fusionio.com
---
V2: Simplified code, removed unnecessary code.
V3: Replaced BUG_ON() with the new ASSERT() from Josef.
V4: Addressed latest comments from Zach Brown and Josef Bacik.
Surrounded all code that is used for the assertion with a
#ifdef CONFIG_BTRFS_ASSERT ... #endif block. Also changed
offset arguments to be more strictly correct.
V5: Updated histograms to reflect latest version of the code.
V6: Use single assert macro and no more #ifdef CONFIG_BTRFS_ASSERT
... #endif logic, as suggested by Miao Xie.
fs/btrfs/ctree.c | 39 +--
1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.c b/fs/btrfs/ctree.c
index 5fa521b..5f38157 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.c
@@ -2426,6 +2426,37 @@ done:
return ret;
}
+static int key_search_validate(struct extent_buffer *b,
+struct btrfs_key *key,
+int level)
+{
+ struct btrfs_disk_key disk_key;
+ unsigned long offset;
+
+ btrfs_cpu_key_to_disk(disk_key, key);
+
+ if (level == 0)
+ offset = offsetof(struct btrfs_leaf, items[0].key);
+ else
+ offset = offsetof(struct btrfs_node, ptrs[0].key);
+
+ return !memcmp_extent_buffer(b, disk_key, offset, sizeof(disk_key));
+}
Maybe I didn't explain clearly in the previous mail, what I suggested was to
move #ifdef CONFIG_BTRFS_ASSERT out of the function, not to remove it. The
final
code is:
#ifdef CONFIG_BTRFS_ASSERT
static int key_search_validate()
{
}
#endif
static int key_search()
{
...
ASSERT(key_search_validate(b, key, level));
...
}
If there is no #ifdef CONFIG_BTRFS_ASSERT wrapper around
key_search_validate(),
the compiler will output the unused function warning if CONFIG_BTRFS_ASSERT is
not set.
Thanks
Miao
+
+static int key_search(struct extent_buffer *b, struct btrfs_key *key,
+ int level, int *prev_cmp, int *slot)
+{
+ if (*prev_cmp != 0) {
+ *prev_cmp = bin_search(b, key, level, slot);
+ return *prev_cmp;
+ }
+
+ ASSERT(key_search_validate(b, key, level));
+ *slot = 0;
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
/*
* look for key in the tree. path is filled in with nodes along the way
* if key is found, we return zero and you can find the item in the leaf
@@ -2454,6 +2485,7 @@ int btrfs_search_slot(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
struct btrfs_root
int write_lock_level = 0;
u8 lowest_level = 0;
int min_write_lock_level;
+ int prev_cmp;
lowest_level = p-lowest_level;
WARN_ON(lowest_level ins_len 0);
@@ -2484,6 +2516,7 @@ int btrfs_search_slot(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
struct btrfs_root
min_write_lock_level = write_lock_level;
again:
+ prev_cmp = -1;
/*
* we try very hard to do read locks on the root
*/
@@ -2584,7 +2617,7 @@ cow_done:
if (!cow)
btrfs_unlock_up_safe(p, level + 1);
-
Re: [PATCH] rwsem: add rwsem_is_contended
Hi Josef, On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 7:14 AM, Josef Bacik jba...@fusionio.com wrote: Btrfs uses an rwsem to control access to its extent tree. Threads will hold a read lock on this rwsem while they scan the extent tree, and if need_resched() they will drop the lock and schedule. The transaction commit needs to take a write lock for this rwsem for a very short period to switch out the commit roots. If there are a lot of threads doing this caching operation we can starve out the committers which slows everybody out. To address this we want to add this functionality to see if our rwsem has anybody waiting to take a write lock so we can drop it and schedule for a bit to allow the commit to continue. Thanks, Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik jba...@fusionio.com FYI, I once tried to introduce something like this before, but my use case was pretty weak so it was not accepted at the time. I don't think there were any objections to the API itself though, and I think it's potentially a good idea if you use case justifies it. Two comments: - Note that there are two rwsem implementations - if you are going to add functionality to rwsem.h you want to add the same functionality in rwsem-spinlock.h as well. - I would prefer if you could avoid taking the wait_lock in your rwsem.h implementation. In your use case (read lock is known to be held), checking for sem-count 0 would be sufficient to indicate a writer is queued (or getting onto the queue). In the general case, some architectures have the various values set up so that RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS != RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS - for these architectures at least, you can check for waiters by looking if the lowest bit of RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS is set in sem-count. -- Michel Walken Lespinasse A program is never fully debugged until the last user dies. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[PATCH] btrfs: use list_for_each_entry_safe() when delete items
Replace list_for_each_entry() by list_for_each_entry_safe() in
__btrfs_close_devices()
list_for_each_entry() {
list_replace_rcu();
call_rcu(); --We may free the device, if we get next
device by the current one, the page fault
may happen.
}
Signed-off-by: Azat Khuzhin a3at.m...@gmail.com
Reviewed-by: Miao Xie mi...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
V2: Add some comments from Miao into commit message
fs/btrfs/volumes.c |4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
index 78b8717..1d1b595 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
@@ -616,13 +616,13 @@ static void free_device(struct rcu_head *head)
static int __btrfs_close_devices(struct btrfs_fs_devices *fs_devices)
{
- struct btrfs_device *device;
+ struct btrfs_device *device, *next;
if (--fs_devices-opened 0)
return 0;
mutex_lock(fs_devices-device_list_mutex);
- list_for_each_entry(device, fs_devices-devices, dev_list) {
+ list_for_each_entry_safe(device, next, fs_devices-devices, dev_list) {
struct btrfs_device *new_device;
struct rcu_string *name;
--
1.7.10.4
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH v6] Btrfs: optimize key searches in btrfs_search_slot
On Sun, Sep 1, 2013 at 8:21 AM, Miao Xie mi...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
On sat, 31 Aug 2013 13:54:56 +0100, Filipe David Borba Manana wrote:
When the binary search returns 0 (exact match), the target key
will necessarily be at slot 0 of all nodes below the current one,
so in this case the binary search is not needed because it will
always return 0, and we waste time doing it, holding node locks
for longer than necessary, etc.
Below follow histograms with the times spent on the current approach of
doing a binary search when the previous binary search returned 0, and
times for the new approach, which directly picks the first item/child
node in the leaf/node.
Current approach:
Count: 6682
Range: 35.000 - 8370.000; Mean: 85.837; Median: 75.000; Stddev: 106.429
Percentiles: 90th: 124.000; 95th: 145.000; 99th: 206.000
35.000 - 61.080: 1235
61.080 - 106.053: 4207
#
106.053 - 183.606: 1122 ##
183.606 - 317.341: 111 #
317.341 - 547.959: 6 |
547.959 - 8370.000: 1 |
Approach proposed by this patch:
Count: 6682
Range: 6.000 - 135.000; Mean: 16.690; Median: 16.000; Stddev: 7.160
Percentiles: 90th: 23.000; 95th: 27.000; 99th: 40.000
6.000 -8.418:58 #
8.418 - 11.670: 1149 #
11.670 - 16.046: 2418
#
16.046 - 21.934: 2098 ##
21.934 - 29.854: 744
29.854 - 40.511: 154 ###
40.511 - 54.848:41 #
54.848 - 74.136: 5 |
74.136 - 100.087: 9 |
100.087 - 135.000: 6 |
These samples were captured during a run of the btrfs tests 001, 002 and
004 in the xfstests, with a leaf/node size of 4Kb.
Signed-off-by: Filipe David Borba Manana fdman...@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik jba...@fusionio.com
---
V2: Simplified code, removed unnecessary code.
V3: Replaced BUG_ON() with the new ASSERT() from Josef.
V4: Addressed latest comments from Zach Brown and Josef Bacik.
Surrounded all code that is used for the assertion with a
#ifdef CONFIG_BTRFS_ASSERT ... #endif block. Also changed
offset arguments to be more strictly correct.
V5: Updated histograms to reflect latest version of the code.
V6: Use single assert macro and no more #ifdef CONFIG_BTRFS_ASSERT
... #endif logic, as suggested by Miao Xie.
fs/btrfs/ctree.c | 39 +--
1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.c b/fs/btrfs/ctree.c
index 5fa521b..5f38157 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.c
@@ -2426,6 +2426,37 @@ done:
return ret;
}
+static int key_search_validate(struct extent_buffer *b,
+struct btrfs_key *key,
+int level)
+{
+ struct btrfs_disk_key disk_key;
+ unsigned long offset;
+
+ btrfs_cpu_key_to_disk(disk_key, key);
+
+ if (level == 0)
+ offset = offsetof(struct btrfs_leaf, items[0].key);
+ else
+ offset = offsetof(struct btrfs_node, ptrs[0].key);
+
+ return !memcmp_extent_buffer(b, disk_key, offset, sizeof(disk_key));
+}
Maybe I didn't explain clearly in the previous mail, what I suggested was to
move #ifdef CONFIG_BTRFS_ASSERT out of the function, not to remove it. The
final
code is:
#ifdef CONFIG_BTRFS_ASSERT
static int key_search_validate()
{
}
#endif
static int key_search()
{
...
ASSERT(key_search_validate(b, key, level));
...
}
If there is no #ifdef CONFIG_BTRFS_ASSERT wrapper around
key_search_validate(),
the compiler will output the unused function warning if CONFIG_BTRFS_ASSERT
is not set.
Ok. I misunderstood what you meant before. If the goal is not to
remove the #ifdef #endif, then honestly I'm not seeing what value the
suggestion brings in compared to patch v5, as it seems purely a style
preference (and highly subjective whether it's better or not).
Nevertheless I'm fine with it and hopefully everyone else will be too.
thanks
Thanks
Miao
+
+static int key_search(struct extent_buffer *b, struct btrfs_key *key,
+ int level, int *prev_cmp, int *slot)
+{
+ if (*prev_cmp != 0) {
+ *prev_cmp = bin_search(b, key, level, slot);
+ return *prev_cmp;
+ }
+
+ ASSERT(key_search_validate(b, key, level));
+ *slot = 0;
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
/*
* look for key in the tree. path is filled in with nodes along the way
* if key is found, we return zero and you can find the item in the leaf
@@ -2454,6 +2485,7 @@ int btrfs_search_slot(struct btrfs_trans_handle
*trans, struct btrfs_root
int write_lock_level = 0;
u8 lowest_level = 0;
int min_write_lock_level;
+ int prev_cmp;
lowest_level = p-lowest_level;
Unmountable filesystem parent transid verify failed
Hi again. Sorry for top posting. I have a 9 disk filesystem that does not mount anymore and need some help/advice so I can recover the data. What happened was that I was running a btrfs delete device under Ubuntu 13.04 Kernel 3.8 and after a long time of moving data around it crashed with a SEGV. Now the filesystem does not mount and none of the recovery options I have tried work. I have upgraded to Debian testing and are now using kerne3.10-2-amd64 When I try btrfsck I get heaps of these : Ignoring transid failure parent transid verify failed on 24419581267968 wanted 301480 found 301495 parent transid verify failed on 24419581267968 wanted 301480 found 301495 parent transid verify failed on 24419581267968 wanted 301480 found 301495 parent transid verify failed on 24419581267968 wanted 301480 found 301495 I have tried using btrfs-image : but it too crashes eventually with : btrfs-image -c9 -t4 /dev/sde btrfs-image ... btrfs-image: ctree.c:787: read_node_slot: Assertion `!(level == 0)' failed. Aborted mount -o ro,recovery fails # mount -o ro,recovery /dev/sde /DATA mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/sde, ... # btrfs-zero-log /dev/sde eventually fails with : btrfs-zero-log: ctree.c:342: __btrfs_cow_block: Assertion `!(btrfs_header_generation(buf) trans-transid)' failed. Aborted What should I try next? regards ronnie sahlberg -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Mixed blocks, he can avoid ENOSPACE error, when he can't allocated metadata blocks?
Hello list, sorry for my bad english anyway. if my message is delirium, just ignore this message. My question: When using mixed blocks, metadata and data chunks has be merge, but we have (when using mixed) speed penalty. how many penalty will be have if we using mixed? Kernel 3.11-rc7, Ubuntu 13.10 x64 my simple test: #Mixed sudo mkfs.btrfs -f -M /dev/sdb #sdb old seagate hdd 80G sudo mount /dev/sdb /mnt time sudo dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/zero bs=1M count=4096 ~48.5s time sudo rm /mnt/zero ~1.5s sudo umount /mnt --- #default setting sudo mkfs.btrfs -f /dev/sdb sudo mount /dev/sdb /mnt time sudo dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/zero bs=1M count=4096 ~48.5s time sudo rm /mnt/zero ~1.5s sudo umount /mnt --- #raw write time sudo dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdb bs=1M count=4096 ~59s I don't see any different between mixed and defaults blocks. So using mixed blocks have sense? Or this is outdated function? Can i change in future type of chunk allocation between mixed and default (with using balance function)? i believe in mixed blocks because this function can awoid problems with ENOSPACE error (when system can't allocated metadata chunk) and can up space utilization on the disk. On slow hdd, we no see any different between profiles, and on speed ssd perfomance penalty should not be significant. (i just using btrfs on my PC (1 TB hdd) and laptop (ssd 128 GB), i like this fs and i haven't any problem (Only enospace, but i just add temp drive and using balance to fix this) and i just try optimizing fs). -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[PATCH] Btrfs: do not add replace target to the alloc_list
If replace was suspended by the umount, replace target device is added
to the fs_devices-alloc_list during a later mount. This is obviously
wrong. -is_tgtdev_for_dev_replace is supposed to guard against that,
but -is_tgtdev_for_dev_replace is (and can only ever be) initialized
*after* everything is opened and fs_devices lists are populated. Fix
this by checking the devid instead: for replace targets it's always
equal to BTRFS_DEV_REPLACE_DEVID.
Cc: Stefan Behrens sbehr...@giantdisaster.de
Signed-off-by: Ilya Dryomov idryo...@gmail.com
---
At first I thought this was caused by my btrfs_device rollback patch,
but no, it just made it easier to spot -- previously one had to reboot
or rmmod/insmod before mounting a suspended replace.
fs/btrfs/volumes.c |3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
index c9a0977..5b99f19 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
@@ -793,7 +793,8 @@ static int __btrfs_open_devices(struct btrfs_fs_devices
*fs_devices,
fs_devices-rotating = 1;
fs_devices-open_devices++;
- if (device-writeable !device-is_tgtdev_for_dev_replace) {
+ if (device-writeable
+ device-devid != BTRFS_DEV_REPLACE_DEVID) {
fs_devices-rw_devices++;
list_add(device-dev_alloc_list,
fs_devices-alloc_list);
--
1.7.10.4
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Device delete returns unable to go below four devices on raid10 on 5 drive setup
On Sun, 2013-09-01 at 14:08 +0200, Steven Post wrote: On Sat, 2013-08-31 at 18:03 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: On Aug 31, 2013, at 5:55 PM, Steven Post redalert.comman...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, 2013-08-31 at 11:42 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: Yes. It might take a few minutes after the chunks are reallocated for the device to be removed from the volume. I've had some cases where even a reboot was needed for the information in fi sh to refresh. I see, so that might be normal behaviour. No, I think it's expected for deleted devices to not appear in the volume listing anymore, but with older kernels I had that experience. I haven't tried it recently with newer kernels. I might have phrased that a bit incorrectly, with 'normal behaviour' I meant it was known to do that and not cause major problems. Of course I would expect the entry to just disappear. I'll let you know the result of the 'device delete' operation on the second machine (3.10.7 kernel). The 3.10.7 kernel doesn't seem to have this issue, the removed device is not listed anymore immediately after the 'device delete' command returns. Although in that instance the array still had 6 drives, not 5 as with the old one. [...] Best regards, Steven signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [PATCH 2/2] btrfs-progs: Update the man page of btrfs
Sorry for the late reply. I checked the new man page, which seems OK for me. Thank you. Qu Wenruo 于 2013年08月06日 07:28, David Sterba 写道: On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 10:43:22AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: Update the man page of btrfs command to keep up with new commands. Thanks. Please check if I haven't missed anything, I've used 'wiggle' to guess-apply the patch and fixed a few conflicts myself. david -- - Qu Wenruo Development Dept.I Nanjing Fujitsu Nanda Software Tech. Co., Ltd.(FNST) No. 6 Wenzhu Road, Nanjing, 210012, China TEL: +86+25-86630566-8526 COINS: 7998-8526 FAX: +86+25-83317685 MAIL: quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com - -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Btrfs: separate out tests into their own directory V2
Sorry, please ignore this thread... Thanks, wang On 09/01/2013 02:15 PM, Wang Shilong wrote: Hello, Using checkpatch.pl, i get the following warnings(errors): WARNING: kfree(NULL) is safe this check is probably not required #132: FILE: fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c:3035: + if (map) + kfree(map); WARNING: line over 80 characters #882: FILE: fs/btrfs/tests/free-space-tests.c:211: + ret = test_add_free_space_entry(cache, 4 * 1024 * 1024, 1 * 1024 * 1024, 1); WARNING: line over 80 characters #927: FILE: fs/btrfs/tests/free-space-tests.c:256: + ret = test_add_free_space_entry(cache, 1 * 1024 * 1024, 4 * 1024 * 1024, 1); WARNING: line over 80 characters #947: FILE: fs/btrfs/tests/free-space-tests.c:276: + ret = test_add_free_space_entry(cache, 4 * 1024 * 1024, 4 * 1024 * 1024, 1); WARNING: line over 80 characters #953: FILE: fs/btrfs/tests/free-space-tests.c:282: + ret = test_add_free_space_entry(cache, 2 * 1024 * 1024, 2 * 1024 * 1024, 0); WARNING: line over 80 characters #1016: FILE: fs/btrfs/tests/free-space-tests.c:345: + ret = test_add_free_space_entry(cache, 1 * 1024 * 1024, 2 * 1024 * 1024, 1); WARNING: line over 80 characters #1022: FILE: fs/btrfs/tests/free-space-tests.c:351: + ret = test_add_free_space_entry(cache, 3 * 1024 * 1024, 1 * 1024 * 1024, 0); WARNING: line over 80 characters #1030: FILE: fs/btrfs/tests/free-space-tests.c:359: + test_msg(Error removing bitmap and extent overlapping %d\n, ret); total: 0 errors, 8 warnings, 997 lines checked patch has style problems, please review. If any of these errors are false positives report them to the maintainer, see CHECKPATCH in MAINTAINERS. Thanks, Wang -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[PATCH] btrfs-progs: replace fails start but in the background v2
when the balance is running, the replace start ioctl
fails (for the right reasons). but since the cli has
put ioctl thread to background (for right reasons)
the user won't know that cli failed to start.
so before cli goes to the background, it should check
if mutually_exclusive_operation_running is not held.
this is done by newly introduced ioctl
BTRFS_IOC_CHECK_DEV_EXCL_OPS by the following kernel patch:
btrfs: introduce BTRFS_IOC_CHECK_DEV_EXCL_OPS ioctl to check dev excl op
v2:
fix checkpatch.pl warnings as spotted by Wang
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
cmds-device.c |4 ++--
cmds-replace.c | 14 ++
ioctl.h|1 +
man/btrfs.8.in |4 ++--
utils.c| 15 +++
utils.h|1 +
6 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/cmds-device.c b/cmds-device.c
index 8446502..27f7f84 100644
--- a/cmds-device.c
+++ b/cmds-device.c
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ static const char * const device_cmd_group_usage[] = {
};
static const char * const cmd_add_dev_usage[] = {
- btrfs device add device [device...] path,
+ btrfs device add [-f] device [device...] path,
Add a device to a filesystem,
NULL
};
@@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ static int cmd_add_dev(int argc, char **argv)
int devfd, res;
u64 dev_block_count = 0;
int mixed = 0;
-
+printf(asj: add %s\n, argv[i]);
res = test_dev_for_mkfs(argv[i], force, estr);
if (res) {
fprintf(stderr, %s, estr);
diff --git a/cmds-replace.c b/cmds-replace.c
index e3ff695..0b2cbc8 100644
--- a/cmds-replace.c
+++ b/cmds-replace.c
@@ -203,6 +203,20 @@ static int cmd_start_replace(int argc, char **argv)
goto leave_with_error;
}
+ /* check if there is some other device exclusive
+* operation running in the FS which won't let this replace
+* to run. And ENOTTY is when older kernel doesn't support
+* lock checking ioctl
+*/
+ ret = is_dev_excl_op_free(fdmnt);
+ if (ret ret != -ENOTTY) {
+ fprintf(stderr,
+ ERROR: replace start failed on \%s\ - %s\n,
+ path,
+ ret 0 ? btrfs_err_str(ret) : strerror(-ret));
+ goto leave_with_error;
+ }
+
srcdev = argv[optind];
dstdev = argv[optind + 1];
diff --git a/ioctl.h b/ioctl.h
index e959720..afadcbc 100644
--- a/ioctl.h
+++ b/ioctl.h
@@ -598,6 +598,7 @@ struct btrfs_ioctl_clone_range_args {
#define BTRFS_IOC_DEV_REPLACE _IOWR(BTRFS_IOCTL_MAGIC, 53, \
struct btrfs_ioctl_dev_replace_args)
#define BTRFS_IOC_DEDUP_CTL _IOW(BTRFS_IOCTL_MAGIC, 55, int)
+#define BTRFS_IOC_CHECK_DEV_EXCL_OPS _IO(BTRFS_IOCTL_MAGIC, 56)
#ifdef __cplusplus
}
diff --git a/man/btrfs.8.in b/man/btrfs.8.in
index d493d7e..0cca5c3 100644
--- a/man/btrfs.8.in
+++ b/man/btrfs.8.in
@@ -47,7 +47,7 @@ btrfs \- control a btrfs filesystem
\fBbtrfs\fP \fB[filesystem] balance status\fP [-v] \fIpath\fP
.PP
.PP
-\fBbtrfs\fP \fBdevice add\fP \fIdevice\fP [\fIdevice...\fP] \fIpath\fP
+\fBbtrfs\fP \fBdevice add\fP [-f] \fIdevice\fP [\fIdevice...\fP]
\fIpath\fP
.PP
\fBbtrfs\fP \fBdevice delete\fP \fIdevice\fP [\fIdevice...\fP] \fIpath\fP
.PP
@@ -386,7 +386,7 @@ be verbose
.RE
.TP
-\fBdevice add\fR\fI dev \fP[\fIdev...\fP] \fIpath\fR
+\fBdevice add\fR [-f] \fI dev \fP[\fIdev...\fP] \fIpath\fR
Add device(s) to the filesystem identified by \fIpath\fR.
.TP
diff --git a/utils.c b/utils.c
index b039a03..c53b7f1 100644
--- a/utils.c
+++ b/utils.c
@@ -1993,3 +1993,18 @@ int is_vol_small(char *file)
return 0;
}
}
+
+/* Returns:
+ * BTRFS_ERROR_DEV_EXCL_RUN_IN_PROGRESS:
+ * If the device is locked to prevent other device operations
+ * from the user cli like device add remove replace balance etc..
+ * 0:
+ * For any other error including if kernel don't support the
+ * ioctl (-ENOTTY)
+ */
+int is_dev_excl_op_free(int fd)
+{
+ int ret;
+ ret = ioctl(fd, BTRFS_IOC_CHECK_DEV_EXCL_OPS, NULL);
+ return ret 0 ? ret : -errno;
+}
diff --git a/utils.h b/utils.h
index eb6fba3..a1e5d67 100644
--- a/utils.h
+++ b/utils.h
@@ -83,4 +83,5 @@ int test_num_disk_vs_raid(u64 metadata_profile, u64
data_profile,
u64 dev_cnt, int mixed, char *estr);
int get_btrfs_mount(const char *dev, char *mp, size_t mp_size);
int is_vol_small(char *file);
+int is_dev_excl_op_free(int fd);
#endif
--
1.7.1
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: btrfs-progs: v3, move out print in cmd_df to another function
Wang, kindly note that this was fixed in v4. Anand On 09/01/2013 02:15 PM, Wang Shilong wrote: Hello, Using checkpatch.pl, i get the following warnings(errors): ERROR: foo * bar should be foo *bar #37: FILE: cmds-filesystem.c:47: +static char * group_type_str(u64 flag) ERROR: foo * bar should be foo *bar #69: FILE: cmds-filesystem.c:63: +static char * group_profile_str(u64 flag) total: 2 errors, 0 warnings, 229 lines checked patch has style problems, please review. If any of these errors are false positives report them to the maintainer, see CHECKPATCH in MAINTAINERS. Thanks, Wang -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: btrfs-progs: v3, move out print in cmd_df to another function
On 09/02/2013 10:58 AM, Anand Jain wrote: Wang, kindly note that this was fixed in v4. Yeah...This is sent by my shell script by accident, I have fixed it and it won't send the repeated message again. Thanks for reminding .. ^_^ Anand On 09/01/2013 02:15 PM, Wang Shilong wrote: Hello, Using checkpatch.pl, i get the following warnings(errors): ERROR: foo * bar should be foo *bar #37: FILE: cmds-filesystem.c:47: +static char * group_type_str(u64 flag) ERROR: foo * bar should be foo *bar #69: FILE: cmds-filesystem.c:63: +static char * group_profile_str(u64 flag) total: 2 errors, 0 warnings, 229 lines checked patch has style problems, please review. If any of these errors are false positives report them to the maintainer, see CHECKPATCH in MAINTAINERS. Thanks, Wang -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
