The original patch could be revised with this support easily.
How about using one structure and one ioctl number for both of them? i.e,
#define BTRFS_IOC_FSLABEL_CTL_IOW(BTRFS_IOCTL_MAGIC, 50, struct
btrfs_ioctl_fslabel_ctl_args)
#define BTRFS_FSLABEL_CTL_GET0
#define BTRFS_FSLABEL_CTL
On 08/30/12 13:55, Jie Liu wrote:
> On 08/30/12 13:44, Anand Jain wrote:
>> Jeff,
>>
>> I don't find the get label ioctl part unless I am missing something.
>> Any idea?
Sorry, I took for granted that this patch has already been merged last
year. :(
To honor your efforts, I'd like to re-send a r
On 08/30/12 13:44, Anand Jain wrote:
>
> Jeff,
>
> I don't find the get label ioctl part unless I am missing something.
> Any idea?
Yes, you're right, I have not post the get label at that time.
The original patch could be revised with this support easily.
How about using one structure and one i
This patch adds btrfs device add/delete test to xfstests. Though case 265 also
does device add/delete test, it is too simple. Compare with case 265, this case
is more complex.
First, this case test the basic function on different storage profiles, on
different
number of the devices.
Second, this
Jeff,
I don't find the get label ioctl part unless I am missing something.
Any idea?
Thxs, -Anand
On 30/08/12 09:54, Anand Jain wrote:
Ah. I missed that. Thanks.
So should use your original patch.
-Anand
On 29/08/12 17:00, Jie Liu wrote:
Hi Anand,
I have posted a patch for set label b
Ah. I missed that. Thanks.
So should use your original patch.
-Anand
On 29/08/12 17:00, Jie Liu wrote:
Hi Anand,
I have posted a patch for set label back to last year, which can be
found at:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1124642/
Besides that, we have discussed to use 50 as the ioctl
Hi Linus,
I've split out the big send/receive update from my last pull request and
now have just the fixes in my for-linus branch:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus
For anyone who wants send/receive updates, they are maintained as well.
But it is has e
Hi Linus,
I've split out the big send/receive update from my last pull request and
now have just the fixes in my for-linus branch:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus
For anyone who wants send/receive updates, they are maintained as well.
But it is has e
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 11:42:33AM -0600, Marc MERLIN wrote:
> With 3.5.2, I created 5 dm-crypted devices from 5 drives.
> I created a raid0 btrfs filesystem and wrote stuff to it.
> One drive died.
>
I fixed this in btrfs-next, please build that and verify it fixes your problem.
Thanks,
Josef
-
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 10:42:33AM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote:
> With 3.5.2, I created 5 dm-crypted devices from 5 drives.
> I created a raid0 btrfs filesystem and wrote stuff to it.
> One drive died.
Is degraded mode supposed to crash for now, or is this something I can
provide more info on to hel
I've been able to run the Debian 7 installer (beta1) and get a working
Debian system on btrfs RAID1 root FS.
A few manual steps and patches required - it would be useful to get
feedback about this process. I might have a go at patching partman to
fully support this through the installer menu.
Hi Anand,
I have posted a patch for set label back to last year, which can be
found at:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1124642/
Besides that, we have discussed to use 50 as the ioctl(2) number at
that time.
task assignment in our wiki page:
https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Project_id
From: Anand Jain
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain
---
fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 10 ++
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 30 ++
fs/btrfs/ioctl.h |2 ++
3 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
index 4bab807..eff506f 10064
From: Anand Jain
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain
---
btrfslabel.c | 90 ++
ioctl.h |2 +
utils.h |1 +
3 files changed, 62 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
diff --git a/btrfslabel.c b/btrfslabel.c
index bf73802..3676db0 100644
This is based on Josef's "Btrfs: turbo charge fsync".
If an inode is a BTRFS_INODE_NODATASUM one, we don't need to look for csum
items any more.
Signed-off-by: Liu Bo
---
fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 23 ---
1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrf
This is based on Josef's "Btrfs: turbo charge fsync".
The current btrfs checks if an inode is in log by comparing
root's last_log_commit to inode's last_sub_trans[2].
But the problem is that this root->last_log_commit is shared among
inodes.
Say we have N inodes to be logged, after the first ino
16 matches
Mail list logo