Marcus Sorensen wrote:
> I too have run into this just today, file system is nearly fresh:
>
>
> [ cut here ]
> kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c:1693!
I just sent out a patch to fix it, see:
[PATCH] Btrfs: reverse enough space for file clone
--
Li Zefan
--
To unsu
# mount -t btrfs /dev/sda7 /mnt
# dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/src bs=10K count=1
# sync
# clone 4K from /mnt/src to /mnt/dst
kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c:1693!
We should reverse space for both file extent item insertion and
inode update.
Signed-off-by: Li Zefan
---
fs/btrfs/ioctl
Excerpts from Chris Mason's message of 2011-07-28 16:28:04 -0400:
> Excerpts from Bruce Guenter's message of 2011-07-28 16:04:45 -0400:
> >
> > At work we have a backup server system running btrfs. The main backup
> > pool is a 1.3TB partition (on LVM). Every night, a series of backups
> > are d
Excerpts from Bruce Guenter's message of 2011-07-28 16:04:45 -0400:
>
> At work we have a backup server system running btrfs. The main backup
> pool is a 1.3TB partition (on LVM). Every night, a series of backups
> are done with rsync, with each backup onto a separate subvolume, and a
> snapshot
At work we have a backup server system running btrfs. The main backup
pool is a 1.3TB partition (on LVM). Every night, a series of backups
are done with rsync, with each backup onto a separate subvolume, and a
snapshot made of each backup. Compression is used to minimize disk
space used.
When
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 07:54:45PM +0200, Stefan Behrens wrote:
> To add a 10% tolerance for btrfs was a bad idea.
> Since the output of df(1) is not yet reliable on btrfs volumes while
> data is not flushed to disk, the better implementation would be to
> either let this test fail, or to force a f
Ahh , this was the kernel warning you mentioned over at ceph. I just
ran into it as well, with a fresh ceph system, all storage nodes are
doing it (must be the cool thing), seems to have led to (or
coincidentally followed by) the "kernel BUG at
fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c:1693!" emailed about.
WARNI
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 07:34:44PM +0100, Simon Arlott wrote:
> I was running rsync when this happened. The filesystem appeared to be ok
> afterwards, with the current temporary file .MVI_0478.MOV.6YQlBJ still
> present.
>
I have a patch for that
Btrfs: don't print the leaf if we had an error
T
I too have run into this just today, file system is nearly fresh:
[ cut here ]
kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c:1693!
invalid opcode: [#9] SMP
CPU 21
Modules linked in: btrfs zlib_deflate ip6t_REJECT nf_conntrack_ipv6
nf_defrag_ipv6 xt_state nf_conntrack ip6tabl
On 7/28/2011 10:47 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 10:28:00AM +0200, Stefan Behrens wrote:
>> Added btrfs to the list of supported filesystems for test 015, and
>> increased free space reporting tolerance to 10% for btrfs.
>> Replaced the call to _scratch_mkfs_xfs with the XF
On 7/28/2011 10:45 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 10:27:58AM +0200, Stefan Behrens wrote:
>> Added btrfs to the list of supported filesystems for this test.
>> Remove output of mkfs since this is specific to mkfs.xfs and now filtered
>> out.
>
> Why can't it be generic? An
two new commands that make use of the new path resolving functions
implemented for scrub, doing the resolving in-kernel. the result for both
commands is a list of files belonging to that inode / logical address.
Signed-off-by: Jan Schmidt
---
btrfs-list.c | 35 +++
btrfs.c | 10
split list_subvols to separate functions and allow printing only in the
containing function. lets us make use of those functions when resolving
logical addresses.
Signed-off-by: Jan Schmidt
---
btrfs-list.c | 104 ++---
1 files changed, 69 ins
Added "inspect-internal inode-resolve" and "inspect-internal
logical-resolve" to the btrfs(8) man page.
Signed-off-by: Jan Schmidt
---
man/btrfs.8.in | 29 +
1 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/man/btrfs.8.in b/man/btrfs.8.in
index 84a60c
Changes v2->v3:
- adapted to a change in the ioctl interface in the accompanying kernel patch
series v8. we now use bytes_missing and bytes_left (unsigned) instead of
size (signed)
- explicit casts added when printing u32 to avoid compiler warnings
Changes v1->v2:
- commands renamed as suggest
On 28.07.2011 16:44, Jan Schubert wrote:
> Jan Schubert GMX.li> writes:
>> OK, Patch 1 to 3 did apply and run successfully on 3.0-git8. I've sent
>> Jan some more details about the output of the affected files (which is
>> actually just one quite large one).
>
> Hooray:
>
> scrub status for 032
On Thu, 28 Jul 2011, Christian Brunner wrote:
> When I look at the latencytop results, there is a high latency when
> calling "btrfs_commit_transaction_async". Isn't "async" supposed to
> return immediately?
It depends. That function has to block until the commit has started
before returning in
2011/7/28 Marcus Sorensen :
> Christian,
>
> Have you checked up on the disks themselves and hardware? High
> utilization can mean that the i/o load has increased, but it can also
> mean that the i/o capacity has decreased. Your traces seem to
> indicate that a good portion of the time is being sp
Jan Schubert GMX.li> writes:
> OK, Patch 1 to 3 did apply and run successfully on 3.0-git8. I've sent
> Jan some more details about the output of the affected files (which is
> actually just one quite large one).
Hooray:
scrub status for 03201fc0-7695-4468-9a10-f61ad79f23ca
scrub started at
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 07:23:43AM +0100, Stephane Chazelas wrote:
> Hiya, I got below those last night. That was 3 minutes after a
> bunch of rsync and ntfsclone processes started.
>
> It's the first time it happens. I upgraded from 3.0rc6 to 3.0
> yesterday.
>
Ok I fixed that recently and Chri
On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 04:23:43 PM Stephane Chazelas wrote:
> Hiya, I got below those last night. That was 3 minutes after a
> bunch of rsync and ntfsclone processes started.
Similar here with an rsync to an external USB drive (SATA) from
a local ext4 partition. This is with the Ubuntu mainline PPA
Hi, Miao,
(2011/07/28 18:08), Miao Xie wrote:
> On thu, 28 Jul 2011 17:30:27 +0900, Tsutomu Itoh wrote:
>> Hi, Chris,
>>
>> In current for-linus kernel,
>>
>> When I ran my test script such as a lot of file creation deletion and
>> balance,
>> the following warning messages were displayed only on
On thu, 28 Jul 2011 17:30:27 +0900, Tsutomu Itoh wrote:
> Hi, Chris,
>
> In current for-linus kernel,
>
> When I ran my test script such as a lot of file creation deletion and balance,
> the following warning messages were displayed only once.
>
> However, I cannot have it still reproduce...
Hi
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 10:28:01AM +0200, Stefan Behrens wrote:
> Added btrfs to the list of supported filesystems for test 079.
> In src/t_immutable.c which is compiled for Linux only, add support for
> btrfs by replacing the ioctl(EXT2_IOC_SETFLAGS) with
> ioctl(FS_IOC_SETFLAGS) which is defined
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 10:28:00AM +0200, Stefan Behrens wrote:
> Added btrfs to the list of supported filesystems for test 015, and
> increased free space reporting tolerance to 10% for btrfs.
> Replaced the call to _scratch_mkfs_xfs with the XFS specific size
> parameter by the generic one for si
2011-07-28 07:23:43 +0100, Stephane Chazelas:
> Hiya, I got below those last night. That was 3 minutes after a
> bunch of rsync and ntfsclone processes started.
>
> It's the first time it happens. I upgraded from 3.0rc6 to 3.0
> yesterday.
[...]
And again this morning, though at that point only o
Same questions as for the previous one.
--
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
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 10:27:58AM +0200, Stefan Behrens wrote:
> Added btrfs to the list of supported filesystems for this test.
> Remove output of mkfs since this is specific to mkfs.xfs and now filtered
> out.
Why can't it be generic? Any reason this one doesn't work on e.g. ext2
or reiserfs?
Added btrfs to the list of supported filesystems for tests 015, 062,
079, 083, 117, 120 and 192.
For test 079 to run, src/t_immutable.c was also modified (for ext2 and
btrfs filesystems).
Stefan Behrens (4):
xfstests: Add support for btrfs in 062
xfstests: Add support for btrfs in 083, 117, 12
Added btrfs to the list of supported filesystems for test 079.
In src/t_immutable.c which is compiled for Linux only, add support for
btrfs by replacing the ioctl(EXT2_IOC_SETFLAGS) with
ioctl(FS_IOC_SETFLAGS) which is defined to be the same.
Afterwards in src/t_immutable.c in function fsetflag(),
Added btrfs to the list of supported filesystems for test 015, and
increased free space reporting tolerance to 10% for btrfs.
Replaced the call to _scratch_mkfs_xfs with the XFS specific size
parameter by the generic one for sized filesystem creation which is
_scratch_mkfs_sized.
Signed-off-by: St
Added btrfs to the list of supported filesystems for this test.
Remove output of mkfs since this is specific to mkfs.xfs and now filtered
out.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Behrens
---
062 |4 ++--
062.out |6 --
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/062 b/062
in
Added btrfs to the list of supported filesystems for tests 083, 117,
120 and 192. For test 083 also changed to use _scratch_mkfs_sized
instead of _scratch_mks_xfs for all filesystem types except for XFS.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Behrens
---
083 | 12 +---
117 |4 ++--
120 |4 ++--
Hi, Chris,
In current for-linus kernel,
When I ran my test script such as a lot of file creation deletion and balance,
the following warning messages were displayed only once.
However, I cannot have it still reproduce...
-Tsutomu
Jul 28 12:01:00 luna kernel: [ 5985.487143] btrfs: found 2799
34 matches
Mail list logo
