Re: weekend of btrfs findings

2012-04-03 Thread Remco Hosman
On 04/04/2012 06:45 AM, Duncan wrote: Remco Hosman posted on Tue, 03 Apr 2012 21:11:26 +0200 as excerpted: after getting a USB enclosure that allowes me to access each of its disks as individual devices, i played around with btrfs a weekend, and here are some questions i hit, but could not find

Re: weekend of btrfs findings

2012-04-03 Thread Duncan
Duncan posted on Wed, 04 Apr 2012 04:45:24 + as excerpted: > Oh, and one more thing. Because btrfs /is/ experimental, (a) be > prepared to lose any data you put on it (but by your comments you > probably understand that bit already), and (b) running current kernels > is critical, as each one

Re: weekend of btrfs findings

2012-04-03 Thread Duncan
Remco Hosman posted on Tue, 03 Apr 2012 21:11:26 +0200 as excerpted: > after getting a USB enclosure that allowes me to access each of its > disks as individual devices, i played around with btrfs a weekend, and > here are some questions i hit, but could not find an answer for. > > Setup: 4 disks

weekend of btrfs findings

2012-04-03 Thread Remco Hosman
hi, after getting a USB enclosure that allowes me to access each of its disks as individual devices, i played around with btrfs a weekend, and here are some questions i hit, but could not find an answer for. Setup: 4 disks, 2x 500gig, 2x1500gig, connected to a SATA port multiplier backplane t

Re: btrfs io errors on 3.4rc1

2012-04-03 Thread Chris Mason
On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 01:16:33PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 01:07:50PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > > > > wait, what... > > > > > > 535 memset(trans, 0, sizeof(*trans)); > > > 536 kmem_cache_free(btrfs_trans_handle_cachep, trans); > > > 537 >

Re: btrfs io errors on 3.4rc1

2012-04-03 Thread David Sterba
On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 01:16:33PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > Yep that fixes it. Chris I'll mail it to you again with a proper sign-off. Thanks! Tested here as well. david -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel

Re: btrfs io errors on 3.4rc1

2012-04-03 Thread Dave Jones
On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 01:07:50PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > > wait, what... > > > > 535 memset(trans, 0, sizeof(*trans)); > > 536 kmem_cache_free(btrfs_trans_handle_cachep, trans); > > 537 > > 538 if (throttle) > > 539 btrfs_run_delaye

Re: btrfs io errors on 3.4rc1

2012-04-03 Thread Dave Jones
On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 12:50:55PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 06:33:43PM +0200, David Sterba wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 12:20:23PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > > > I see a lot of these .. > > > > > > btrfs: __btrfs_end_transaction -EIO abored=1802201963 (no s

Re: btrfs io errors on 3.4rc1

2012-04-03 Thread Dave Jones
On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 06:33:43PM +0200, David Sterba wrote: > On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 12:20:23PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > > I see a lot of these .. > > > > btrfs: __btrfs_end_transaction -EIO abored=1802201963 (no super error) > > 1802201963 == 0x6b6b6b6b > > #define POISON_FREE

Re: btrfs io errors on 3.4rc1

2012-04-03 Thread David Sterba
On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 12:20:23PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > I see a lot of these .. > > btrfs: __btrfs_end_transaction -EIO abored=1802201963 (no super error) 1802201963 == 0x6b6b6b6b #define POISON_FREE 0x6b/* for use-after-free poisoning */ hmm -- To unsubscribe from this list: send

Re: btrfs io errors on 3.4rc1

2012-04-03 Thread Dave Jones
On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 04:26:07PM +0200, David Sterba wrote: > On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 09:47:22PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > > 49b25e0540904be0bf558b84475c69d72e4de66e is the first bad commit > > btrfs: enhance transaction abort infrastructure > > Attached patch adds several debugging pr

Re: btrfs io errors on 3.4rc1

2012-04-03 Thread David Sterba
On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 09:47:22PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > 49b25e0540904be0bf558b84475c69d72e4de66e is the first bad commit > btrfs: enhance transaction abort infrastructure Attached patch adds several debugging printks to help to track down where the EIOs come from. As there are no message

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: do not mount when we have a sectorsize unequal to PAGE_SIZE

2012-04-03 Thread David Sterba
On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 04:35:28PM +0800, Liu Bo wrote: > > That's strange. Does it mean that if I create the filesystem and then > > reboot to another kernel with different PAGE_SIZE then the filesystem > > is unaccessible for me? > > I'm afraid yes until we can deal with sectorsize and PAGE_S

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: do not mount when we have a sectorsize unequal to PAGE_SIZE

2012-04-03 Thread Liu Bo
On 04/03/2012 04:06 PM, Karel Zak wrote: > On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:56:53AM +0800, Liu Bo wrote: >> Our code is not ready to cope with a sectorsize that's not equal to >> PAGE_SIZE. >> It will lead to hanging-on while writing something. >> >> Signed-off-by: Liu Bo >> --- >> fs/btrfs/disk-io.c

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: do not mount when we have a sectorsize unequal to PAGE_SIZE

2012-04-03 Thread Karel Zak
On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:56:53AM +0800, Liu Bo wrote: > Our code is not ready to cope with a sectorsize that's not equal to PAGE_SIZE. > It will lead to hanging-on while writing something. > > Signed-off-by: Liu Bo > --- > fs/btrfs/disk-io.c |6 +++--- > 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3