per mount(2)
---
multiple mounts can be stacked on the same mount point.
---
In this situation how could ioctl communicate
(using mount point) with each FS stacked on the
same mount point ?
BTW I don't understand the need for multiple
mounts on the same mount point ?
Any idea. ?
On 11 February 2014 07:59, Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net wrote:
Saint Germain posted on Tue, 11 Feb 2014 04:15:27 +0100 as excerpted:
Ok I need to really understand how my motherboard works (new Z87E-ITX).
It is written 64Mb AMI UEFI Legal BIOS, so I thought it was really
UEFI.
I expect it's
So i was wondering why test 004 could pass my previous wrong
kernel patch while it defenitely should not.
By some debugging, i found here perl script is wrong, we did not
filter out anything and this unit test did not work acutally.so
it came out we will never fail this test.
Signed-off-by: Wang
The function call that set the ret parameter evaluated in this
BUG_ON was removed in a previous commit:
11be10f71e1af5256f221feb9e91300b3e28bbef
Btrfs-progs: make fsck fix certain file extent inconsistencies
Signed-off-by: Mitch Harder mitch.har...@sabayonlinux.org
---
cmds-check.c | 1 -
1 file
On 02/10/2014 05:26 PM, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
On 02/10/2014 05:41 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
= New and improved btrfs fi df =
Since people using this tool are already going to be better informed
and since we are already given the block group flags we can go ahead
and do the raid
Hi!
Today I started getting those on 3.14-rc. One core as displayed as 100%
system CPU. I rebooted cause the system didn´t respond consistently to
user input anymore.
I solved this by adding about the last 13,5 GiB of free space on this
Intel SSD 320 to it:
merkaba:~ df -hT /home
Dateisystem
Hello and thanks for your feedback !
Cc back to the mailing-list as it may be of interest here as well.
On 11 February 2014 16:11, Kyle Gates kylega...@hotmail.com wrote:
The big problem I currently have is that based on your input, I
hesitate a lot on my partitioning scheme: should I use a
On Feb 10, 2014, at 8:15 PM, Saint Germain saint...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok I need to really understand how my motherboard works (new Z87E-ITX).
It is written 64Mb AMI UEFI Legal BIOS, so I thought it was really
UEFI.
Manufacturers have done us a disservice by equating UEFI and BIOS. Some UEFI
On Feb 10, 2014, at 11:59 PM, Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net wrote:
Saint Germain posted on Tue, 11 Feb 2014 04:15:27 +0100 as excerpted:
Ok I need to really understand how my motherboard works (new Z87E-ITX).
It is written 64Mb AMI UEFI Legal BIOS, so I thought it was really
UEFI.
I
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 01:41:23PM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
On 02/10/2014 01:36 PM, cwillu wrote:
IMO, used should definitely include metadata, especially given that we
inline small files.
I can convince myself both that this implies that we should roll it
into b_avail, and that we should
On 11 February 2014 18:21, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
On Feb 10, 2014, at 8:15 PM, Saint Germain saint...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok I need to really understand how my motherboard works (new Z87E-ITX).
It is written 64Mb AMI UEFI Legal BIOS, so I thought it was really
UEFI.
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 01:59:07PM +, Frank Kingswood wrote:
On 10/02/14 13:47, Hugo Mills wrote:
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 01:28:38PM +, Frank Kingswood wrote:
I'm attempting to back up a btrfs subvolume
[...]
Doing so runs out of file descriptors on the sending machine (having
over
On Feb 11, 2014, at 10:02 AM, Saint Germain saint...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello and thanks for your feedback !
Cc back to the mailing-list as it may be of interest here as well.
On 11 February 2014 16:11, Kyle Gates kylega...@hotmail.com wrote:
The big problem I currently have is that based
On Feb 11, 2014, at 10:36 AM, Saint Germain saint...@gmail.com wrote:
grub-install device shouldn't work on UEFI because the only place
grub-install installs is to the volume mounted at /boot/efi. And also
grub-install /dev/sdb implies installing grub to a disk boot sector, which
also
On 02/11/2014 02:14 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On 02/10/2014 05:26 PM, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
On 02/10/2014 05:41 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
= New and improved btrfs fi df =
[...]
Hi Josef
The problem I had with this patch was it didn't give me a way to get
the original output. I
On 11/02/14 18:11, David Sterba wrote:
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 01:59:07PM +, Frank Kingswood wrote:
On 10/02/14 13:47, Hugo Mills wrote:
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 01:28:38PM +, Frank Kingswood wrote:
I'm attempting to back up a btrfs subvolume
[...]
Doing so runs out of file descriptors
On 02/11/2014 01:20 PM, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
On 02/11/2014 02:14 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On 02/10/2014 05:26 PM, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
On 02/10/2014 05:41 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
= New and improved btrfs fi df =
[...]
Hi Josef
The problem I had with this patch was it
On 02/11/2014 07:33 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On 02/11/2014 01:20 PM, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
On 02/11/2014 02:14 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On 02/10/2014 05:26 PM, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
On 02/10/2014 05:41 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
= New and improved btrfs fi df =
[...]
Hi
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 07:20:23PM +0100, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
On 02/11/2014 02:14 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On 02/10/2014 05:26 PM, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
On 02/10/2014 05:41 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
= New and improved btrfs fi df =
[...]
Hi Josef
The problem I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/02/14 19:13, cwillu wrote:
But the answer changes dramatically depending on whether it's large
numbers of small files or a small number of large files, and the
conservative worst-case choice means we report a number that is half
what is
Saint Germain posted on Tue, 11 Feb 2014 11:04:57 +0100 as excerpted:
The big problem I currently have is that based on your input, I hesitate
a lot on my partitioning scheme: should I use a dedicated /boot
partition or should I have one global BTRFS partition ?
It is not very clear in the
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 10:36 AM, Martin Steigerwald
mar...@lichtvoll.de wrote:
Today I started getting those on 3.14-rc. One core as displayed as 100%
system CPU. I rebooted cause the system didn´t respond consistently to
user input anymore.
Does 3.14-rc1 have Joseph's delayed refs throttling
Anand Jain posted on Tue, 11 Feb 2014 16:18:02 +0800 as excerpted:
per mount(2)
---
multiple mounts can be stacked on the same mount point.
---
In this situation how could ioctl communicate (using mount point) with
each FS stacked on the same mount point ?
BTW I don't
Chris Murphy posted on Tue, 11 Feb 2014 11:15:56 -0700 as excerpted:
The distros should be pressured to move to grub 2.02, currently in beta,
upon release. And I think it would be good for Btrfs testers to build
grub 2.02 beta, and try to break it with various Btrfs configurations so
that it
Please ignore this patchset since adding a new option to find_mount_root
is not the best method to
solve the problem.
I'll send a better version patch to fix it.
Thanks
Qu
On mon, 10 Feb 2014 15:28:27 +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Before this patchset, 'btrfs fi show' can work with '/mnt/point' but
Any plans on having brtfs fi df report more precise values rather then
rounded off to the nearest hundredth of a unit. full kilobytes(1024 bytes
=1Kib) or in bytes would be nice
Current output:
# btrfs fi df /data
Data, single: total=1.37TiB, used=1.35TiB
System, DUP: total=8.00MiB,
Thanks.
In the context of btrfs,
what is the critical need of this feature ?
OR
what is that it can't do without this feature ?
Thanks, Anand
On 02/12/14 04:57 AM, Duncan wrote:
Anand Jain posted on Tue, 11 Feb 2014 16:18:02 +0800 as excerpted:
per mount(2)
---
multiple
Most of the btrfs-progs output has to be (re)designed from the point
of view of the end-user.
Eg: 'btrfs su list /mnt', it could have been much better from the end
user perspective (who does not have to look into the source code),
of course it does make sense to the developers himself but
Anand Jain posted on Wed, 12 Feb 2014 11:37:35 +0800 as excerpted:
On 02/12/14 04:57 AM, Duncan wrote:
Anand Jain posted on Tue, 11 Feb 2014 16:18:02 +0800 as excerpted:
per mount(2)
---
multiple mounts can be stacked on the same mount point.
---
In this situation how could
Fix a problem that does not use the result of realpath(), which caused
check_arg_type() can't handle mount point which ends with a final '/'.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com
Cc: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
cmds-filesystem.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2
BTW, another (general) reason over-mounts are sometimes used is to
deliberately obscure what's underneath. It's worth noting that anything
with a file already open on the underlying filesystem still has access to
that file after something else is mounted over top, and that fact is
sometimes
31 matches
Mail list logo
