2012/3/9 Chris Samuel ch...@csamuel.org:
On 09/03/12 12:31, Liu Bo wrote:
So are these warnings based on the latest upstream of btrfs?
Looks like it was 3.2.7, his oops said:
Pid: 1488, comm: mips-wrs-linux- Tainted: G W 3.2.7 #2 HP
Yep, that's 3.2.7. Now I can't upgrade to
On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 09:31:25AM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
There were quite many things happening in the system at that time.
Can't really tell what could trigger this.
Complete logs: http://91.234.146.107/~difrost/logs/tampere_log.gz
So are these warnings based on the latest upstream of
2012/3/9 David Sterba d...@jikos.cz:
On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 09:31:25AM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
There were quite many things happening in the system at that time.
Can't really tell what could trigger this.
Complete logs: http://91.234.146.107/~difrost/logs/tampere_log.gz
So are these
On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 12:08:12PM +0100, Jacek Luczak wrote:
For this one I've created also a report [1].
so there is probably other problem in reservations and it just blew up
during
the unlink call.
Could be as this came up after a longer time of throwing above WARN_ON.
I'm now
On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 09:27:08AM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
This is not against the normal branch, so we must inform people that. :)
Have a quick look, and I guess it is for Btrfs: allow metadata blocks
larger than the page size, isn't it?
yes it is.
david
--
To unsubscribe from this list:
Hello,
Is it ever possible for a superblock for a mounted filesystem to be
free'd without a previous call to unmount the filesystem?
I need to be certain that the function cleancache_invalidate_fs, which
is at the moment called by deactivate_locked_super (fs/super.c) [1],
is called before every
On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 12:34:01PM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
On 03/09/2012 12:25 PM, Daniel J Blueman wrote:
When testing out 16KB blocks with direct I/O [1] on 3.3-rc6, we
quickly see btrfs_search_slot returning positive numbers, popping an
assertion [2].
Are 4KB block sizes known broken
2012/3/9 David Sterba d...@jikos.cz:
On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 12:08:12PM +0100, Jacek Luczak wrote:
For this one I've created also a report [1].
so there is probably other problem in reservations and it just blew up
during
the unlink call.
Could be as this came up after a longer time
2012/3/9 Jacek Luczak difrost.ker...@gmail.com:
2012/3/9 David Sterba d...@jikos.cz:
On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 12:08:12PM +0100, Jacek Luczak wrote:
For this one I've created also a report [1].
so there is probably other problem in reservations and it just blew up
during
the unlink call.
On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 12:29:29PM +0100, Lukas Czerner wrote:
Hi,
I have created a simple script which creates a bunch of files with
random names in the directory and then performs operation like list,
tar, find, copy and remove. I have run it for ext4, xfs and btrfs with
the 4k size
We can run into a problem where we find an eb for our existing page already on
the radix tree but it has a ref count of 0. It hasn't yet been removed by RCU
yet so this can cause issues where we will use the EB after free. So do
atomic_inc_not_zero on the exists-refs and if it is zero just do
2012/3/9 David Sterba d...@jikos.cz:
On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 03:33:24PM +0100, Jacek Luczak wrote:
Those two issues go inline. After a longer while of WARN_ON the BUG_ON
hit again.
One more observation. Host is running builds from CI system. After
BUG_ON pop up all builds take 50% more
2012/3/9 Jacek Luczak difrost.ker...@gmail.com:
2012/3/9 David Sterba d...@jikos.cz:
On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 03:33:24PM +0100, Jacek Luczak wrote:
Those two issues go inline. After a longer while of WARN_ON the BUG_ON
hit again.
One more observation. Host is running builds from CI system.
I need to be able to safely deal with refs in my next patch, so convert refs and
pages_reading to ints and introduce an eb_lock spinlock so I can use this to
safely manipulate the refs count when marking eb's as stale. Thanks,
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik jo...@redhat.com
---
fs/btrfs/backref.c
Am Sat, 25 Feb 2012 20:05:13 -0800
schrieb Fahrzin Hemmati fahh...@gmail.com:
No, at least not yet, nor am I aware of any plans for subvolume
quotas, though I could be wrong.
Arne Jansen is working on it, IIRC.
regards,
Johannes
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe
2012/3/9 David Sterba d...@jikos.cz:
On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 12:08:12PM +0100, Jacek Luczak wrote:
For this one I've created also a report [1].
so there is probably other problem in reservations and it just blew up
during
the unlink call.
Could be as this came up after a longer time
Hi Linus,
I have two additional and btrfs fixes in my for-linus branch
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus
One is a casting error that leads to memory corruption on i386 during
scrub, and the other fixes a corner case in the backref walking code
(also
On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 04:09:43PM -0800, Andreas Dilger wrote:
I have also run the correlation.py from Phillip Susi on directory with
10 4k files and indeed the name to block correlation in ext4 is pretty
much random :)
Just reading this on the plane, so I can't find the exact
18 matches
Mail list logo
