When decompressing a chunk of data, we'll copy the data out to
a working buffer if the data is stored in more than one page,
otherwise we'll use the mapped page directly to avoid memory
copy.
In the latter case, we'll end up accessing the kernel address
after we've unmapped the page in a corner ca
- Check user-specified flags correctly
- Check the inode owership
- Search root item in root tree but not fs tree
Reported-by: Dan Rosenberg
Signed-off-by: Li Zefan
---
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c |7 +--
1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c b/fs/btrfs/io
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Dan Magenheimer
wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Matt [mailto:jackdac...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2011 5:12 PM
>> To: Minchan Kim
>> Cc: Dan Magenheimer; gre...@suse.de; Chris Mason; linux-
>> ker...@vger.kernel.org; linux...@kvack.or
On 02/15/2011 11:35 PM, Yuri D'Elia wrote:
> Hi everyone. I was trying to test a more recent version of btrfs on my
> current kernel (2.6.37) using dkms, without success.
>
> I followed these instructions:
>
> https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Btrfs_source_repositories
>
> - cloned the re
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 1:27 AM, Dan Magenheimer
wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Matt [mailto:jackdac...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2011 5:12 PM
>> To: Minchan Kim
>> Cc: Dan Magenheimer; gre...@suse.de; Chris Mason; linux-
>> ker...@vger.kernel.org; linux...@kvack.org
> -Original Message-
> From: Matt [mailto:jackdac...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2011 5:12 PM
> To: Minchan Kim
> Cc: Dan Magenheimer; gre...@suse.de; Chris Mason; linux-
> ker...@vger.kernel.org; linux...@kvack.org; ngu...@vflare.org; linux-
> bt...@vger.kernel.org; Josef Baci
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 4:35 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Matt wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 1:24 AM, Matt wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 12:08 AM, Matt wrote:
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 1:03 AM, Dan Magenheimer
wrote:
[snip]
>
> If I've
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 8:59 PM, Matt wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 1:29 AM, Matt wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 1:24 AM, Matt wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 12:08 AM, Matt wrote:
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 1:03 AM, Dan Magenheimer
wrote:
[snip]
>
> If I've missed
i fixed a braces code style issue on inode.c
Signed-off-by: Tim Peters
---
fs/btrfs/inode.c |5 ++---
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
index fb9bd78..46125c3 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
@@ -467,11 +467
Hi all,
I'm currently envision a backup setup for my laptop which has a SSD. I
would like to use an external HDD und span a raid1 over these two
devices and also creating snapshots. What I would like to prevent, is
that these snapshots take storage space on the SSD, because SSD
storage is precious
If shrinking done as part of the online device removal fails add that
device back to the allocation list and increment the rw_devices counter.
This fixes two bugs:
1) we could have a perfectly good device out of alloc list for no good
reason;
2) in the btrfs consisting of two devices, failure in
This fixes a bug introduced in d4d77629, where the device added online
(and therefore initialized via btrfs_init_new_device()) would be left
with the positive bdev->bd_holders after unmount. Since d4d77629 we no
longer OR FMODE_EXCL explicitly on blkdev_put(), set it in
btrfs_device->mode.
Signed
Hey, all -- crfs (a network protocol that, I think, rides on top of btrfs)
seemed like something kind of cool, but the Oracle page was last updated
in '08. Is it truly dead, or just back-burnered?
Thanks!
-Ken
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the b
Hi everyone. I was trying to test a more recent version of btrfs on my current
kernel (2.6.37) using dkms, without success.
I followed these instructions:
https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Btrfs_source_repositories
- cloned the repo
- symlinked to /usr/src/btrfs-git
- patched version.sh:
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 11:30:38AM +, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> On 14/02/11 17:58, Marti Raudsepp wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 17:01, Chris Mason wrote:
> >> Or, it could just be delalloc ;)
> >
> > I suspect delalloc. After creating the file, filefrag reports "1
> > extent found", but for
This is the modified version of my previous patch.
This patch is created by removing the duplicated (conflicted) code
of the following work.
Tsutomu Itoh (1) commits (+7/-3):
Btrfs: check return value of alloc_extent_map()
http://marc.info/?l=linux-btrfs&m=129774185204197&w=2
Regards,
2011/
To make Btrfs code more robust, several return value checks where memory
allocation can fail are introduced. I use BUG_ON where I don't know how
to handle the error properly, which increases the number of using the
notorious BUG_ON, though.
Signed-off-by: Yoshinori Sano
---
fs/btrfs/compression.
On 14/02/11 17:58, Marti Raudsepp wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 17:01, Chris Mason wrote:
>> Or, it could just be delalloc ;)
>
> I suspect delalloc. After creating the file, filefrag reports "1
> extent found", but for some reason it doesn't actually print out
> details of the extent.
That's
18 matches
Mail list logo
