[ Resending in plain text... sorry for the duplicate ]
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 6:14 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 08:55:59AM +0800, majianpeng wrote:
> > On 2012-07-31 05:42 Dave Chinner Wrote:
> > >On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 03:14:28PM +0800, majianpeng wrote:
> > >> Whe
If verify_parent_transid() fails for all mirrors, the current code
calls repair_io_failure() anyway which means:
- that the disk block is rewritten without repairing anything and
- that a kernel log message is printed which misleadingly claims
that a read error was corrected.
This is an example:
From: Arne Jansen
Signed-off-by: Jan Schmidt
Signed-off-by: Arne Jansen
---
This is the rebased version of Arne's qgroup patch set. He's the
original author, which is why I'm sending with his author tag.
---
Makefile |4 +-
btrfs.c |2 +
cmds-qgroup.c| 454 +++
So far the return code of barrier_all_devices() is ignored, which
means that errors are ignored. The result can be a corrupt
filesystem which is not consistent.
This commit adds code to evaluate the return code of
barrier_all_devices(). The normal btrfs_error() mechanism is used to
switch the files
On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 06:49:10AM -0600, Chris Samuel wrote:
> On 08/10/2012 07:49 PM, Lluís Batlle i Rossell wrote:
>
> > Am I right that it is not in 3.5.1?
>
> I don't believe fixes can be considered for stable releases until
> they're in the mainline, so until Linus processes that last merg
On 08/10/2012 07:49 PM, Lluís Batlle i Rossell wrote:
Am I right that it is not in 3.5.1?
I don't believe fixes can be considered for stable releases until
they're in the mainline, so until Linus processes that last merge
request from Chris it can't happen (and he's not done so yet).
That
On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 04:38:47AM -0600, Miao Xie wrote:
> Onthu, 9 Aug 2012 14:04:05 -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 09:10:17PM -0600, Miao Xie wrote:
> >> If we create several snapshots at the same time, the following BUG_ON()
> >> will be
> >> triggered.
> >>
> >>
On thu, 9 Aug 2012 14:04:05 -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 09:10:17PM -0600, Miao Xie wrote:
>> If we create several snapshots at the same time, the following BUG_ON() will
>> be
>> triggered.
>>
>> kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:6047!
>>
>> Steps to reproduce:
On Thu, 9 Aug 2012 09:21:29 +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 08:48:02AM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
>> and down, no problems so far, and the "wikipedia" test-subvol stresstest
>> that caused trouble to one of your patches is also ok. I'll do some more
>> testing on other machines
On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 01:58:33PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 11:56:06AM -0600, Lluís Batlle i Rossell wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 01:40:11PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 11:36:45AM -0600, David Sterba wrote:
> > > > according to assembly,
btrfsck misinformed "unresolved ref root" message when there were several
snapshots in the file system. The patch(commit cfdd42686c70) tried to fix
this bug, but didn't fix it completely. If the metadata was stored in a
shared leaf of the tree, the problem would happen again. This patch fixes
it by
The variant named 'leaf' in is_child_root() still hold old result after
we get the next leaf, it make btrfsck returns the wrong result, such as
"unresolved ref root ..", fix it.
Signed-off-by: Miao Xie
---
Changelog v1 -> v2:
- just change the title of this patch.
---
btrfsck.c |1 +
1 files
This patch fixed the following warning:
cmds-send.c:464:6: warning: ‘ret' may be used uninitialized in this function
[-Wuninitialized]
crc32c.c:121:1: warning: control reaches end of non-void function
[-Wreturn-type]
send-utils.c:69:11: warning: ‘comp' may be used uninitialized in this function
13 matches
Mail list logo
