Sort items in man page, to put together items in the same group,
and to put sequences of SYSNOPSIS and COMMANDS in same order.
Signed-off-by: Hidetoshi Seto
---
man/btrfs.8.in | 28 ++--
1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/man/btrfs.8.in b/m
Remove duplicated entry for filesystem defrag, finish renaming
device show to filesystem show, fix some minor misdescriptions
and fix some format tokens.
Signed-off-by: Hidetoshi Seto
---
man/btrfs.8.in | 22 +++---
1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git
The commit 6f81e1197015ab2dc41beec92c347919feb26967 in for-chris
branch is strange; somehow it does not apply a part of fixes and
contains the dropped hunk in its patch description.
This patch is to apply the dropped hunk.
Signed-off-by: Hidetoshi Seto
---
man/btrfs.8.in | 12 ++--
1
Hi,
Following patch set fixes/cleanups the man page of btrfs command.
Based on for-chris branch.
Thanks,
H.Seto
Hidetoshi Seto (3):
btrfs-progs: Update/clean up btrfs help and man page V2 (cont.)
btrfs-progs: Misc fix for btrfs man page
btrfs-progs: Sort commands/descriptions
On 09/29/2011 10:59 PM, Chris Mason wrote:
> Excerpts from Arne Jansen's message of 2011-09-29 04:40:30 -0400:
>> On 29.09.2011 10:36, Yan, Zheng wrote:
>>> On 09/29/2011 04:18 PM, Liu Bo wrote:
On 09/29/2011 12:25 PM, Yan, Zheng wrote:
> On 09/29/2011 10:00 AM, Liu Bo wrote:
>> The bt
On 10/27/2011 02:40 AM, Kai Krakow wrote:
I'm trying to rm some files, this is what I get in dmesg:
[snip]
Can you ls the directory where the problem files are located? What would the
the output? I had a very similar problem but on 3.0.x kernel when several
files suddenly got corrupted.
I ca
(2011/10/27 3:26), Hugo Mills wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 01:51:31PM -0400, Phillip Susi wrote:
>> It still doesn't appear to have returned to kernel.org. Should that
>> happen sometime soon, or is it available somewhere else now?
>
>If the wiki was up (which should be coming back to ker
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
After a fresh mkfs.btrfs, I'm trying to understand the data structures,
and I'm a little confused about what keeps the boot sector from being
allocated to a file.
According to the device tree, the first 4mb of the disk are mapped
directly to the first
On 10/26/2011 06:27 PM, Chris Mason wrote:
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 06:23:38PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 04:47:15PM +0200, Arne Jansen wrote:
The sizes get initialized to 4096, but after the super block is read,
these are replaced by those from the SB.
[reads sources a
Hallo, Kai,
Du meintest am 26.10.11:
> I can run "find -type f" for directories I suspect corrupted files
> in, and I see errors in dmesg if it happens to contain bad files. But
> no oopses and the system remains stable. If I mount the filesystem
> read-only I can even read these files without oo
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 01:51:31PM -0400, Phillip Susi wrote:
> It still doesn't appear to have returned to kernel.org. Should that
> happen sometime soon, or is it available somewhere else now?
If the wiki was up (which should be coming back to kernel.org in
the next few weeks, I'm told), you
It still doesn't appear to have returned to kernel.org. Should that
happen sometime soon, or is it available somewhere else now?
--
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.ker
Hello!
2011/10/26 dima :
>> I'm trying to rm some files, this is what I get in dmesg:
[snip]
>
> Can you ls the directory where the problem files are located? What would the
> the output? I had a very similar problem but on 3.0.x kernel when several
> files suddenly got corrupted.
I can run "find
On Wed, 26 Oct 2011, Christian Brunner wrote:
> 2011/10/26 Sage Weil :
> > On Wed, 26 Oct 2011, Christian Brunner wrote:
> >> >> > Christian, have you tweaked those settings in your ceph.conf? It
> >> >> > would be
> >> >> > something like 'journal dio = false'. If not, can you verify that
> >>
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 06:23:38PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 04:47:15PM +0200, Arne Jansen wrote:
> > The sizes get initialized to 4096, but after the super block is read,
> > these are replaced by those from the SB.
>
> [reads sources again] right, and the initial value
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 04:47:15PM +0200, Arne Jansen wrote:
> The sizes get initialized to 4096, but after the super block is read,
> these are replaced by those from the SB.
[reads sources again] right, and the initial values are not used up to
that point, so 4096 could be any number.
> It was
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/26/2011 12:09 PM, David Sterba wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 11:18:42AM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
extent_io_tree *tree, u64 start, u64 end, - gfp_t
mask); + gfp_t mask) __must_check;
>>> ^^
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 11:18:42AM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
> >> extent_io_tree *tree, u64 start, u64 end, - gfp_t
> >> mask);
> >> + gfp_t mask) __must_check;
> > shouldn't this be placed at the beginning of the
> > prototype?
>
> I don't see
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/26/2011 11:10 AM, David Sterba wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've tested it and still crashes in xfstets/113, but this time I
> know what to look for :)
>
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 09:02:43PM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
>> --- a/fs/btrfs/extent_io.h +++ b/fs
Hi,
I've tested it and still crashes in xfstets/113, but this time I know
what to look for :)
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 09:02:43PM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
> --- a/fs/btrfs/extent_io.h
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/extent_io.h
> @@ -200,10 +200,10 @@ void free_extent_state(struct extent_sta
> int test_range_
On 10/26/2011 03:34 PM, David Sterba wrote:
Hi,
sorry for late reply. This patch tries to unify node-/leaf-/... sizes
nad put it just into fs_info, but this assumes all trees share the same
sizes. Unfortunatelly this is not true (once we allow big blocks; soon?).
The root tree has a hardcoded s
Hi,
sorry for late reply. This patch tries to unify node-/leaf-/... sizes
nad put it just into fs_info, but this assumes all trees share the same
sizes. Unfortunatelly this is not true (once we allow big blocks; soon?).
The root tree has a hardcoded size of 4k, see the __setup_root called
with 4k
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:22:48PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:15:45PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 11:05:12AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:25:02PM +0200, Christian Brunner wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Attached is a perf-r
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 1:10 PM, Leonidas Spyropoulos
wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 12:51 PM, David Sterba wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 12:33:05PM +0100, Leonidas Spyropoulos wrote:
>>> Here is it, it's big and contains usless information..
>>>
>>> http://paste.pocoo.org/show/497299/
>>
>
Hallo, dima,
Du meintest am 26.10.11:
>> I'm trying to rm some files, this is what I get in dmesg:
>>
>> [30975.249519] [ cut here ]
>> [30975.249529] WARNING: at fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:4588
>> __btrfs_free_extent+0x3b7/0x7ed()
[...]
>> [30975.249604] Pid: 12291, comm: r
On 10/25/2011 01:48 PM, Kai Krakow wrote:
Hello list!
I'm trying to rm some files, this is what I get in dmesg:
[30975.249519] [ cut here ]
[30975.249529] WARNING: at fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:4588
__btrfs_free_extent+0x3b7/0x7ed()
[30975.249532] Hardware name:
[30975.24953
2011/10/26 Christian Brunner :
> 2011/10/25 Josef Bacik :
>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:15:45PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
>>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 11:05:12AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
>>> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:25:02PM +0200, Christian Brunner wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > Attached is a perf-repo
2011/10/26 Sage Weil :
> On Wed, 26 Oct 2011, Christian Brunner wrote:
>> >> > Christian, have you tweaked those settings in your ceph.conf? It would
>> >> > be
>> >> > something like 'journal dio = false'. If not, can you verify that
>> >> > directio shows true when the journal is initialized f
28 matches
Mail list logo
