Re: converting lzo compression to zlib compression?

2013-06-17 Thread David Sterba
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 02:16:53AM +0900, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote: I'd like to see how much space would I save by converting it to zlib. Would it be possible to convert lzo compression to zlib compression with the following: - mount the filesystem with compress=zlib - run defrag on all

Re: [3.10-rc6] WARNING: at fs/btrfs/inode.c:7961 btrfs_destroy_inode+0x265/0x2e0 [btrfs]()

2013-06-17 Thread Chris Mason
Quoting Dave Jones (2013-06-17 09:49:55) Hit this while running this script in a loop.. https://github.com/kernelslacker/io-tests/blob/master/setup.sh [34385.251507] [ cut here ] [34385.254068] WARNING: at fs/btrfs/inode.c:7961 btrfs_destroy_inode+0x265/0x2e0

[PATCH] Btrfs: optimize read_block_for_search

2013-06-17 Thread Josef Bacik
This patch does two things, first it only does one call to btrfs_buffer_uptodate() with the gen specified instead of once with 0 and then again with gen specified. The other thing is to call btrfs_read_buffer() on the buffer we've found instead of dropping it and then calling read_tree_block().

[3.10-rc6] WARNING: at fs/btrfs/inode.c:7961 btrfs_destroy_inode+0x265/0x2e0 [btrfs]()

2013-06-17 Thread Dave Jones
Hit this while running this script in a loop.. https://github.com/kernelslacker/io-tests/blob/master/setup.sh [34385.251507] [ cut here ] [34385.254068] WARNING: at fs/btrfs/inode.c:7961 btrfs_destroy_inode+0x265/0x2e0 [btrfs]() [34385.257275] Modules linked in:

[PATCH] Btrfs: optimize reada_for_balance

2013-06-17 Thread Josef Bacik
This patch does two things. First we no longer explicitly read in the blocks we're trying to readahead. For things like balance_level we may never actually use the blocks so this just adds uneeded latency, and balance_level and split_node will both read in the blocks they care about explicitly

Re: [3.10-rc6] WARNING: at fs/btrfs/inode.c:7961 btrfs_destroy_inode+0x265/0x2e0 [btrfs]()

2013-06-17 Thread Chris Mason
Quoting Dave Jones (2013-06-17 14:20:06) On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 01:39:42PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote: Quoting Dave Jones (2013-06-17 09:49:55) Hit this while running this script in a loop.. https://github.com/kernelslacker/io-tests/blob/master/setup.sh [34385.251507] [

Re: [3.10-rc6] WARNING: at fs/btrfs/inode.c:7961 btrfs_destroy_inode+0x265/0x2e0 [btrfs]()

2013-06-17 Thread Dave Jones
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 02:42:27PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote: Quoting Dave Jones (2013-06-17 14:20:06) On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 01:39:42PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote: Quoting Dave Jones (2013-06-17 09:49:55) Hit this while running this script in a loop..

BUG at fs/btrfs/print-tree when trying to mount after a crash

2013-06-17 Thread Michael Zugelder
Hi, my laptop with a btrfs on dm-crypt on SSD freezed today shortly after resuming from suspend (it doesn't normally do that). I was running a self compiled 3.9.6 at this point. There should be around 20 of 114 GiB free on the file system and it was probably created with 16K leaf size. After

btrfs triggered 'MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAINS too low'

2013-06-17 Thread Dave Jones
Something else I've seen a few times from my io script (Always during btrfs runs)... BUG: MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAINS too low! turning off the locking correctness validator. Please attach the output of /proc/lock_stat to the bug report CPU: 1 PID: 492255 Comm: kworker/u8:0 Not tainted 3.10.0-rc6+ #6

Re: [PATCH 0/4] btrfs: offline dedupe v2

2013-06-17 Thread Mark Fasheh
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 02:10:37PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 02:31:34PM -0600, Mark Fasheh wrote: Hi, The following series of patches implements in btrfs an ioctl to do offline deduplication of file extents. Ok I'm relatively happy with this set, I just want to

[PATCH] Btrfs: move btrfs_truncate_page to btrfs_cont_expand instead of btrfs_truncate

2013-06-17 Thread Josef Bacik
This has plagued us forever and I'm so over working around it. When we truncate down to a non-page aligned offset we will call btrfs_truncate_page to zero out the end of the page and write it back to disk, this will keep us from exposing stale data if we truncate back up from that point. The

Re: Filesystem somewhat destroyed - need help for recovery/fixing

2013-06-17 Thread Josef Bacik
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 09:08:26PM +, Alexander Skwar wrote: Hello I think, I somewhat destroyed my btrfs filesystem on my Ubuntu 13.04 kernel 3.8.0-25-lowlatency system. It got destroyed, because the system was hanging for some other reason and I had to remove power... When I try

Re: Filesystem somewhat destroyed - need help for recovery/fixing

2013-06-17 Thread Alexander Skwar
Hello Josef On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:21 PM, Josef Bacik jba...@fusionio.com wrote: Pull down my tree git://github.com/josefbacik/btrfs-progs.git and build and run the fsck in there and see if it's a bit more friendly. I just gave it a try, but wasn't successful, it seems… Kernel still

[PATCH] btrfs-progs: update man page for btrfs filesystem label

2013-06-17 Thread Guangyu Sun
btrfs filesystem label can work on a mounted filesystem, also on a multi-devices filesystem. And the restriction of label name is changed, too. The man page should be updated accordingly. Signed-off-by: Guangyu Sun guangyu@oracle.com --- man/btrfs.8.in | 17 - 1 file

[no subject]

2013-06-17 Thread AFG GTBANK LOAN
Loan Syndicacion Am AFG Guaranty Trust Bank, zu strukturieren wir Kreditlinien treffen Sie unsere Kunden spezifischen geschäftlichen Anforderungen und einen deutlichen Mehrwert für unsere Kunden Unternehmen. eine Division der AFG Finance und Private Bank plc. Wenn Sie erwägen, eine große

Re: [RFC PATCH] Btrfs: optimize csums insertion function

2013-06-17 Thread Miao Xie
Any comments? Thanks Miao On thu, 13 Jun 2013 20:22:17 +0800, Miao Xie wrote: Before applying this patch, we search the csum item at first, and If the new csums is adjoining to the existed csum item, we call btrfs_search_slot() to grow this item. It is unnecessary because we can re-use the

[PATCH] Btrfs: fix wrong csum clone when doing relocation

2013-06-17 Thread Miao Xie
From: Josef Bacik jba...@fusionio.com Patch Btrfs: remove btrfs_sector_sum structure introduced a problem that we copied the checksum value to the wrong address when doing relocation. The reason is: It is very likely that one ordered extent has two or more checksum structures to keep the

[PATCH] Btrfs-progs: do not print uuid 0 when printing root item

2013-06-17 Thread Wang Shilong
Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong wangshilong1...@gmail.com --- print-tree.c | 6 -- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/print-tree.c b/print-tree.c index aae47a9..c1d8d18 100644 --- a/print-tree.c +++ b/print-tree.c @@ -355,8 +355,10 @@ static void print_root(struct