Hallo, Nikos,
Du meintest am 21.10.11:
> What went wrong in the following scenario? BTRFS thinks that a device
> is mounted while it is not.
[...]
> btrfs device scan /dev/sdh
> Scanning for Btrfs filesystems in '/dev/sdh'
> ERROR: unable to scan the device '/dev/sdh' - Invalid argument
> ## C
From: Andi Kleen
Mainly so that ubifs can use it.
Snappy is a better compressor in the same niche as LZO.
Only lightly tested so far. Experiences welcome.
Cc: herb...@gondor.apana.org.au
Cc: dedeki...@gmail.com
Cc: adrian.hun...@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen
---
crypto/Kconfig |9
From: Andi Kleen
Add support in btrfs for snappy compression.
This is based on the lzo code with minor modifications.
The btrfs glue code could be significantly improved over LZO
by exploiting some snappy features, but hasn't so far.
Open: implement scatter-gather support and get rid of the tem
From: Andi Kleen
This is a C port of the google snappy compressor. It has roughly
comparable compression to LZO, but is significantly faster on many file
types. For example it beats all other compressors on already
compressed data.
I ported the original C++ code over to C and did some changes
to
Hello all,
What went wrong in the following scenario? BTRFS thinks that a device is
mounted while it is not.
BTRFS tools ver: Btrfs v0.19-101-g3891d2d
Uname: 3.1.0-rc7-686-pae
## Comment: Initially we had only root (/) mounted as btrfs
mount |grep btrfs
/dev/sdc2 on / type btrfs (rw,autodefrag)
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain
---
common.rc |1 +
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/common.rc b/common.rc
index e3c4e67..cab0b64 100644
--- a/common.rc
+++ b/common.rc
@@ -1547,6 +1547,7 @@ _populate_fs()
root=root # path of initial root of directory tree
Create snapshots in various ways, modify the data around the block and
file boundaries and verify the data integrity.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain
---
264 | 193 +++
264.out |2 +
group |1 +
3 files changed, 196 insertions(
This will verify the various raid features in btrfs and device
replacement functionality.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain
---
265 | 187 +++
265.out |2 +
group |1 +
3 files changed, 190 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
create m
SCRATCH_DEV takes single disk as the scratch place for testing. New
SCRATCH_DEV_POOL can used to specify multiple disks for the scratch
btrfs filesystem.
Using SCRATCH_DEV and or SCRATCH_DEV_POOL will follow the following logic.
btrfs FS OR any FS
SCRATCH_DEV_POOL is unset and SCRATCH_DEV is
snapshot data integrity test-case needs filesystem with random data.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain
---
common.rc | 21 ++---
1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/common.rc b/common.rc
index e948169..37379a5 100644
--- a/common.rc
+++ b/common.rc
@@ -1490,
Anand Jain (5):
updating to fill files with random data
Added SCRATCH_DEV_POOL to specify multiple disks for the btrfs RAID
264: Functional test case for the btrfs snapshot
265: Functional test case for the btrfs raid operations
_populate_fs should use OPTIND when getopts is used
264
On 19/10/2011 17:45, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
+if [ $dev_removed == 1 ]; then
+ umount $SCRATCH_MNT
+_devmgt_add "${DEVHTL}"
+fi
messy indendation.
got it. thanks.
+ btrfs filesystem balance $SCRATCH_MNT || _fail "balance failed"
+ #btrfs filesystem show
On 19/10/2011 17:43, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 02:28:55PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
To verify the btrfs de-fragmentation does not fail.
Any reason you can't simply fold btrfs defragmentation testing into
the existing common defragmentation test (218)?
oh! 218 ! let m
comments in line.
On 19/10/2011 17:42, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 02:28:54PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
Create snapshots in various ways, modify the data around the block and
file boundaries and verify the data integrity.
The test itselt looks good enough, but I have some
2011/10/20 Liu Bo :
> On 10/17/2011 11:23 PM, Christian Brunner wrote:
>> 2011/10/11 Christian Brunner :
>>
>> I have updated to a 3.0.6 kernel, with all the btrfs patches from
>> josef's git repo this weekend. But I'm still seeing the following
>> warning:
>>
>
> Hi,
>
> Would you try with this pa
We no longer use the orphan block rsv for holding the reservation for truncating
the inode, so instead use the global block rsv and check to make sure it has
enough space for us to truncate the space. Thanks,
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik
---
fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c | 22 +---
Hi Anand,
I changed the replication level of the rbd pool, from one to two.
ceph osd pool set rbd size 2
And then during the sync the bug happened, but today I could not
reproduce it.
So I do not have a testcase for you.
Best Regards,
martin
Am 19.10.2011 17:02, schrieb Anand Jain:
I tried
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 05:25:18PM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
> In commit ab1ca99b51df63901617b9f10f9a36d5d4972d78
> (Btrfs: reset to appropriate block rsv after orphan operations),
> we miss a block_rsv reset and this sometimes leads us to
> the WARNING of btrfs_orphan_commit_root().
>
> Signed-off-by:
On 10/17/2011 11:23 PM, Christian Brunner wrote:
> 2011/10/11 Christian Brunner :
>> 2011/10/11 Liu Bo :
>>> On 10/10/2011 12:41 AM, Christian Brunner wrote:
I just realized that this is still the same warning I reported some month
ago.
I thought that this had been fixed with
>
In commit ab1ca99b51df63901617b9f10f9a36d5d4972d78
(Btrfs: reset to appropriate block rsv after orphan operations),
we miss a block_rsv reset and this sometimes leads us to
the WARNING of btrfs_orphan_commit_root().
Signed-off-by: Liu Bo
---
fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c |4 +++-
1 files chang
20 matches
Mail list logo
