On Wed, 9 Oct 2013 23:01:35 -0300, Geyslan G. Bem wrote:
When 'dir' is NULL, after calling extref_get_fields(), add_inode_ref()
can be returning without freeing the 'name' pointer.
Added kfree when necessary.
Signed-off-by: Geyslan G. Bem geys...@gmail.com
---
fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 5
Mike Audia posted on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 06:20:42 -0400 as excerpted:
I think I found a bug affecting btrfs filesystems and users invoking
fstrim to discard unused blocks: if I execute a `fstrim -v /` twice, the
amount trimmed does not change on the 2nd invocation AND it takes just
as long as
On mount failures, __btrfs_close_devices can be called well before
dev-replace state is read and -is_tgtdev_for_dev_replace is set. This
leads to a bogus decrement of -rw_devices and sets off a WARN_ON in
__btrfs_close_devices if replace target device happens to be on the
lists and we fail early
struct btrfs_ioctl_dev_replace_args memory is leaked if replace is
requested on a read-only filesystem. Fix it.
Signed-off-by: Ilya Dryomov idryo...@gmail.com
---
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c |9 +
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
For both balance and replace, cancelling involves changing the on-disk
state and committing a transaction, which is not a good thing to do on
read-only filesystems.
Cc: Stefan Behrens sbehr...@giantdisaster.de
Signed-off-by: Ilya Dryomov idryo...@gmail.com
---
fs/btrfs/dev-replace.c |3 +++
I have 1.5TB of data on a single disk formatted with defaults. There
appears to be only two directory trees of a few MBytes that have
suffered corruption (due to in the past too high a sata speed causing
corruption).
The filesystem mounts fine. But how to clear out the corrupt trees?
At the
On Oct 10, 2013, at 12:27 PM, Martin m_bt...@ml1.co.uk wrote:
I have 1.5TB of data on a single disk formatted with defaults. There
appears to be only two directory trees of a few MBytes that have
suffered corruption (due to in the past too high a sata speed causing
corruption).
The
On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 04:34:43PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Sat, Oct 05, 2013 at 04:52:18PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 09:53:02AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 06:34:39PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
Hi stable team,
please add the following
So both Liu and I made huge messes of find_lock_delalloc_range trying to fix
stuff, me first by fixing extent size, then him by fixing something I broke and
then me again telling him to fix it a different way. So this is obviously a
candidate for some testing. This patch adds a pseudo fs so we
On 10/11/2013 01:40 AM, Ilya Dryomov wrote:
I have a question in my mind.
Can we reach a state that there is operation in progress when filesystem
has been readonly?If we do cancel operations on a ro filesystem, we should
get No operations in progress .
Thanks,
Wang
For both balance and
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 09:02:57PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
So both Liu and I made huge messes of find_lock_delalloc_range trying to fix
stuff, me first by fixing extent size, then him by fixing something I broke
and
then me again telling him to fix it a different way. So this is obviously
11 matches
Mail list logo
