Re: [PATCH 0/5] btrfs: snapshot deletion via readahead

2012-04-27 Thread Arne Jansen
Hi Liu Bo, thanks for testing :) so one block reserve ran out of space. Did you use the same test as before? On SSD? Thanks, Arne On 27.04.2012 05:16, Liu Bo wrote: Sorry for the long delay. I've tested the droptree patch (1/5-5/5) on the latest upstream 3.4-rc4 along with the missed

Re: [PATCH 0/5] btrfs: snapshot deletion via readahead

2012-04-27 Thread Liu Bo
On 04/27/2012 02:13 PM, Arne Jansen wrote: Hi Liu Bo, thanks for testing :) so one block reserve ran out of space. Did you use the same test as before? On SSD? Yes, the same test on SSD, but with different number of snapshot: 1000, 2000 respectively :) For the block reserve ENOSPC,

Re: [PATCH 1/4] vfs: introduce try_to_writeback_inodes_sb(_nr)

2012-04-27 Thread Miao Xie
于 2012年04月26日 23:12, Josef Bacik 写道: On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 03:55:52PM +0800, Xie Miao wrote: On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 11:11 AM, Dave Chinner da...@fromorbit.com wrote: writeback_inodes_sb(_nr) grabs s_umount lock when it want to start writeback, it may bring us deadlock problem when doing

Re: [PATCH 2/4] Btrfs: fix deadlock on sb-s_umount when doing umount

2012-04-27 Thread Miao Xie
The reason the deadlock is that: Task Btrfs-cleaner umount() down_write(s-s_umount) sync_filesystem() do auto-defragment and produce lots of dirty pages

Re: Ceph on btrfs 3.4rc

2012-04-27 Thread Christian Brunner
Am 24. April 2012 18:26 schrieb Sage Weil s...@newdream.net: On Tue, 24 Apr 2012, Josef Bacik wrote: On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 05:09:34PM +0200, Christian Brunner wrote: After running ceph on XFS for some time, I decided to try btrfs again. Performance with the current for-linux-min branch and

Re: worker list corruption crash

2012-04-27 Thread Josef Bacik
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 10:26:27AM +0800, Daniel J Blueman wrote: In 3.4-rc4, I've come across worker list corruption while scrubbing, leading to (in two separate cases) warning [1] and crashing [2]. The connection with scrubbing is likely the increased rate of worker threads starting and

Re: Optionally enforced time-based ACLs for BTRFS

2012-04-27 Thread Chris Mason
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 05:27:12PM -0400, David Bruzos wrote: Hi Chris: Thank you for your very informative response. I will post the message to linux-fsdevel and see what they have to say about it. Any comments you would like to share regarding why something like what I

[PATCH] Btrfs: kill unreachable code in push_node_left

2012-04-27 Thread Jan Schmidt
We had the following code in push_node_left: x = min(y, x); if (x y) { /* confusing comment here */ ... } That if's condition can't become true, so just kill the entire block. Plus: no one will ever need to worry about the removed

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: kill unreachable code in push_node_left

2012-04-27 Thread Jan Schmidt
Actually, scratch that one. Sorry, -Jan On 27.04.2012 17:03, Jan Schmidt wrote: We had the following code in push_node_left: x = min(y, x); if (x y) { /* confusing comment here */ ... } That if's condition can't become true, so just