Jordan Windsor posted on Wed, 27 Jun 2012 13:16:44 +0930 as excerpted:
My computer locked up and I had to press the reset button.
Ever since then I can't mount the btrfs filesystem, here's the output:
Are you aware of the btrfs wiki and have you read up on btrfs there, yet?
Hi Josef,
I have rerun the test with btrfs-next master branch. fio reported
mismatched blocks again. Mount options were the same (-o
noatime,nodatacow).
In both cases the drive is a 135Gb drive, while the total size of
allocated block groups is around 60Gb:
Data: total=62.01GB, used=49.04GB
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 4:25 AM, Liu Bo liubo2...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
On 06/25/2012 05:20 AM, Alexander Block wrote:
This patchset introduces the btrfs filesystem property command. It is the
result of a discussion we had on IRC. I tried to make the properties
interface as generic and
Hi,
running btrfs filesystem defrag somehow always returns a non-zero exit code,
even when it succeeds:
[lenz@metis btrfs-progs]% sudo ./btrfs filesystem defrag -v /mnt
/mnt
Btrfs v0.19-102-g2482539-dirty
[lenz@metis btrfs-progs]% echo $?
20
[lenz@metis btrfs-progs]% sudo ./btrfs filesystem
On Ubuntu 11.10 Oneiric with gcc 4.6.1, compiling the btrfs tools from git
fails for me with the following error:
[lenz@metis btrfs-progs]% make
bash version.sh
gcc -lpthread -g -Werror -Os -o btrfs btrfs.o btrfs_cmds.o scrub.o \
ctree.o disk-io.o radix-tree.o extent-tree.o
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 02:05:55PM +0200, Lenz Grimmer wrote:
Hi,
running btrfs filesystem defrag somehow always returns a non-zero exit code,
even when it succeeds:
Yes, this is a known problem, and one that's on my list of things
to deal with. Thanks for the reminder, though.
I'm no
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 6:11 AM, Lenz Grimmer l...@grimmer.com wrote:
On Ubuntu 11.10 Oneiric with gcc 4.6.1, compiling the btrfs tools from git
fails for me with the following error:
Which git repo?
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-progs.git
builds on ubuntu just fine
This patchset introduces the btrfs property subgroup. It is the
result of a discussion we had on IRC. I tried to make the properties
interface as generic and extensible as possible. Comments are welcome.
Currently the command group looks like this:
btrfs prop set [-t type] /path/to/object name
Btrfs send/receive and btrfs props needs this ioctl. This patch
requires a recent kernel with the Btrfs: use _IOR for
BTRFS_IOC_SUBVOL_GETFLAGS patch applied.
Signed-off-by: Alexander Block abloc...@googlemail.com
---
ioctl.h |2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/ioctl.h
get_label prints the label at the moment. Change this so that
the label is returned and printing is done by the caller.
Also bail out when open_ctree failed to avoid a crash when btrfs fi
label is called on a device with no btrfs on it.
Signed-off-by: Alexander Block abloc...@googlemail.com
---
btrfs filesystem property is a generic interface to set/get
properties on filesystem objects (inodes/subvolumes/filesystems
/devs).
This patch adds the generic framework for properties and also
implements two properties. The first is the read-only property
for subvolumes and the second is the
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 11:47:15PM -0600, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote:
Yes i will do so. Right now i was trying to compare discard with non
discard with this simple command:
for i in `seq 0 1 1000`; do dd if=/dev/zero of=t_$i bs=4M count=1; rm
t_$i; done;
But i hit a new bug:
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 02:15:59AM -0600, Alex Lyakas wrote:
Hi Josef,
I have rerun the test with btrfs-next master branch. fio reported
mismatched blocks again. Mount options were the same (-o
noatime,nodatacow).
Ok I'll try running it again here locally, I didn't realize it was nodatacow.
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 09:46:44PM -0600, Jordan Windsor wrote:
Hello,
My computer locked up and I had to press the reset button.
Ever since then I can't mount the btrfs filesystem, here's the output:
Already fixed, go to the newest kernel you can get ahold of, 3.5-rc4 is the
newest I think?
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 08:55:20PM -0500, David Nicol wrote:
I've noticed that the patches I posted here two years ago about an
ioctl to allow userspace to wait for deferred ops to complete aren't
included in the has all patches posted to mailing list git repo. Is
this an oversight or is there
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 10:32:22AM -0600, Chester wrote:
Hey Josef, the btrfsck was dirty. Here it is pasted inline.
Ok, do btrfsck --repair on the device (the device must be unmounted) and
hopefully it will fix everything. Thanks,
Josef
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:35:11PM +0200, Alexander Block wrote:
Hello,
This is the second attempt to bring in cross subvolume reflinks into btrfs.
The first attempt was NAKed due to missing vfs mount checks and a clear
description of what btrfs subvolumes are and probably also why cross
When delayed refs exist, btrfs_find_all_roots used to hold the delayed ref
mutex way longer than actually required. We ought to drop it immediately
after we're done collecting all the delayed refs.
Signed-off-by: Jan Schmidt list.bt...@jan-o-sch.net
---
fs/btrfs/backref.c |3 +--
1 files
When a MOD_LOG_KEY_ADD operation is rewinded, we remove the key from the
tree block. If its not the last key, removal involves a move operation.
This move operation was explicitly done before this commit.
However, at insertion time, there's a move operation before the actual
addition to make room
Hi Chris,
I expect this to be my last fixup set for the 3.5 series. All seven
fixes are pretty small, five of them for the tree mod log (3-7), one
generic for backref walking (2) and one fixing a starvation issue when
waiting for more delayed refs (1).
You can pull my patches based on your
We track two conditions to decide if we should sleep while waiting for more
delayed refs, the number of delayed refs (num_refs) and the first entry in
the list of blockers (first_seq).
When we suspect staleness, we save num_refs and do one more cycle. If
nothing changes, we then save first_seq
With the tree mod log, we can have a tree that's two levels high, but
btrfs_search_old_slot may still return a path with the tree root at level
one instead. __resolve_indirect_ref must care for this and accept parents in
a lower level than expected.
Signed-off-by: Jan Schmidt
Several callers of insert_ptr set the tree_mod_log parameter to 0 to avoid
addition to the tree mod log. In fact, we need all of those operations. This
commit simply removes the additional parameter and makes addition to the
tree mod log unconditional.
Signed-off-by: Jan Schmidt
For the tree mod log, we don't log any operations at leaf level. If the root
is at the leaf level (i.e. the tree consists only of the root), then
__tree_mod_log_oldest_root will find a ROOT_REPLACE operation in the log
(because we always log that one no matter which level), but no other
With the tree mod log, we may end up with two roots (the current root and a
rewinded version of it) both pointing to two leaves, l1 and l2, of which l2
had already been cow-ed in the current transaction. If we don't rewind any
tree blocks, we cannot have two roots both pointing to an already cowed
Hi Alexander,
On 06/27/2012 03:16 PM, Alexander Block wrote:
This patchset introduces the btrfs property subgroup. It is the
result of a discussion we had on IRC. I tried to make the properties
interface as generic and extensible as possible. Comments are welcome.
Currently the command
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 11:24:30AM -0600, Frederik Himpe wrote:
After an unclean shutdown, Linux 3.5-rc4 fails to mount one of my btrfs
file systems. This backtrace can be found in the logs:
Fix is in btrfs-next
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/josef/btrfs-next.git;a=summary
Thanks,
silly gmail rich-text...
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 1:42 PM, David Nicol davidni...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 9:31 AM, David Sterba d...@jikos.cz wrote:
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 08:55:20PM -0500, David Nicol wrote:
[let's discuss the] architecture
Simply waiting is not
On Tue, 2012-06-26 at 16:19 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
list *(btrfs_finish_ordered_io+0x22)
Reading symbols from /home/nmoureyii/kernel/linux-3.5-rc4/vmlinux...done.
(gdb) list *(btrfs_finish_ordered_io+0x22)
0xc1237552 is in btrfs_finish_ordered_io (fs/btrfs/inode.c:1864).
1859 * fully
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 7:41 PM, Goffredo Baroncelli kreij...@libero.it wrote:
Hi Alexander,
On 06/27/2012 03:16 PM, Alexander Block wrote:
This patchset introduces the btrfs property subgroup. It is the
result of a discussion we had on IRC. I tried to make the properties
interface as
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Josef Bacik jba...@fusionio.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 10:32:22AM -0600, Chester wrote:
Hey Josef, the btrfsck was dirty. Here it is pasted inline.
Ok, do btrfsck --repair on the device (the device must be unmounted) and
hopefully it will fix
We can race with unlink and not actually be able to do our igrab in
btrfs_add_ordered_extent. This will result in all sorts of problems.
Instead of doing the complicated work to try and handle returning an error
properly from btrfs_add_ordered_extent, just hold a ref to the inode during
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 12:57:52PM -0600, Nathan A. Mourey II wrote:
On Tue, 2012-06-26 at 16:19 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
list *(btrfs_finish_ordered_io+0x22)
Reading symbols from /home/nmoureyii/kernel/linux-3.5-rc4/vmlinux...done.
(gdb) list *(btrfs_finish_ordered_io+0x22)
0xc1237552 is
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 11:47:15PM -0600, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote:
Yes i will do so. Right now i was trying to compare discard with non
discard with this simple command:
for i in `seq 0 1 1000`; do dd if=/dev/zero of=t_$i bs=4M count=1; rm
t_$i; done;
But i hit a new bug:
On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 09:42:56 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
From: Josef Bacik jo...@redhat.com
Miao pointed out there's a problem with mixing dio writes and buffered
reads. If the read happens between us invalidating the page range and
actually locking the extent we can bring in pages into page
35 matches
Mail list logo
