[BUG]
btrfsck will segfault if it fails to open the fs tree or tree root.
[REPRODUCER]
Execute btrfsck on a highly damaged btrfs image.
fsfuzz can be used to make a junk btrfs image.
[REASON]
Current open_ctree() in btrfs-progs support OPEN_CTREE_PARTIAL flag to
allow return fs_info even some of
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 12:45:12PM -0700, Omar Sandoval wrote:
> > > @@ -639,8 +640,7 @@ static int send_header(struct send_ctx *sctx)
> > > - return write_buf(sctx->send_filp, &hdr, sizeof(hdr),
> > > - &sctx->send_off);
> > > + return write_buf(sctx->send_filp, &hd
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 06:07:38PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 01:48:11AM -0700, Omar Sandoval wrote:
> > The buffer passed to vfs_write in send and several casts of ioctl fields are
> > missing the __user annotation. Also fixes a couple of related trivial style
> > issues.
On 09/26/2014 12:14 AM, Eryu Guan wrote:
Run btrfs balance and scrub operations simultaneously with fsstress
running in background.
Signed-off-by: Eryu Guan
---
common/rc | 9 +
tests/btrfs/060 | 114
tests/btrfs/060.o
On 09/26/2014 12:14 AM, Eryu Guan wrote:
Run btrfs balance and subvolume create/mount/umount/delete simultaneously,
with fsstress running in background.
Signed-off-by: Eryu Guan
---
common/rc | 110 +++--
tests/btrfs/059 | 115 +++
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 06:29:25PM +0100, Filipe David Manana wrote:
> It's better than before, but I still need the *full* output from the
> tree commands and receive -vv --max-errors=0.
(sent off list due to size)
Marc
--
"A mouse is a device used to point at the xterm you want to type in" - A
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 4:43 PM, Marc MERLIN wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 01:10:37PM +0100, Filipe David Manana wrote:
>> > Is there a patch you'd like me to try, or should I just work around the
>> > problem by deleting all these directories and recreating in 2 steps to
>> > get around the bu
A user reported a WARN_ON() when trying to run btrfsck --repair on his fs with
bad key ordering. This was because the root that was broken wasn't part of the
transaction yet. We do this open coded thing in a few other places in fsck, so
just make it a helper function and make sure all the places
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 05:45:49PM +0900, Satoru Takeuchi wrote:
> In the current implementation, compression property == "" has
> the two different meanings: one is with BTRFS_INODE_NOCOMPRESS,
> and the other is without this flag.
>
> So, even if the two files a and b have the same compression
>
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 02:55:29PM +0900, Satoru Takeuchi wrote:
> Since "__" prefix means static helper, rename __btrfs_set_prop() to
> btrfs_set_prop_trans.
>
> Signed-off-by: Naohiro Aota
> Signed-off-by: Satoru Takeuchi
Reviewed-by: David Sterba
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the l
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 01:48:12AM -0700, Omar Sandoval wrote:
> Fix several sparse warnings that can easily be addressed with context
> annotations. These annotations also provide some sort of documentation for the
> internal helper functions.
>
> Signed-off-by: Omar Sandoval
Reviewed-by: David
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 01:48:11AM -0700, Omar Sandoval wrote:
> The buffer passed to vfs_write in send and several casts of ioctl fields are
> missing the __user annotation. Also fixes a couple of related trivial style
> issues.
>
> Signed-off-by: Omar Sandoval
Reviewed-by: David Sterba
> @@
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 10:02:16AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> On 09/09/2014 05:19 AM, rongqing...@windriver.com wrote:
> > From: Li RongQing
> >
> > It is impossible that csum_size is larger than sizeof(long), but the codes
> > still add the handler for this condition, like allocate new memory,
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 01:10:37PM +0100, Filipe David Manana wrote:
> > Is there a patch you'd like me to try, or should I just work around the
> > problem by deleting all these directories and recreating in 2 steps to
> > get around the bug?
>
> For the moment you'll have to use the workaround.
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 10:38:03PM +0100, WorMzy Tykashi wrote:
> I was wondering if you could shed some light on the status of the
> integration branches. Are these going to be discontinued now that you
> are maintaining and tagging the official btrfs-progs releases, or will
> they stick around, s
On 2014-09-29 16:10 (Mon), Liu Bo wrote:
Hi Tomasz,
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 02:00:18PM +0200, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
System froze under 3.17.0-rc6 with btrfs. It had to be hard rebooted.
How does this happen? A stressful write with compression?
Rsync (with --inplace - can be stressful
On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 02:04:29PM +0200, Olivier Bonvalet wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a btrfs partition which throw kernel BUG, even with linux
> 3.17-rc3 (I tried 3.14.16, 3.16.1 and 3.17-rc3 kernels) :
>
> [ 45.058466] [ cut here ]
> [ 45.058539] kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/
Hi Tomasz,
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 02:00:18PM +0200, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
> System froze under 3.17.0-rc6 with btrfs. It had to be hard rebooted.
>
> Sep 29 05:50:21 bkp010 kernel: [559018.459704] NMI watchdog: BUG:
> soft lockup - CPU#6 stuck for 22s! [kworker/u16:24:16872]
> Sep 29 05:50:2
From: Anand Jain
(added RFC prefix to the patch header)
(as of now just an experimental interface)
This patch introduces profs interface /proc/fs/btrfs/devlist,
which as of now exports all the members of kernel fs_devices.
The current /sys/fs/btrfs interface works when the fs is
mounted, and is
(as of now just an experimental interface)
This patch introduces profs interface /proc/fs/btrfs/devlist,
which as of now exports all the members of kernel fs_devices.
The current /sys/fs/btrfs interface works when the fs is
mounted, and is on the file directory hierarchy and also has
the sysfs li
On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 9:19 PM, Marc MERLIN wrote:
> Hi Filipe and others,
>
> After I moved directories around, and since then my hourly
> btrfs backup is failing.
>
> Does this output help?
Partially.
>
> Is there a patch you'd like me to try, or should I just work around the
> problem by del
System froze under 3.17.0-rc6 with btrfs. It had to be hard rebooted.
Sep 29 05:50:21 bkp010 kernel: [559018.459704] NMI watchdog: BUG: soft
lockup - CPU#6 stuck for 22s! [kworker/u16:24:16872]
Sep 29 05:50:21 bkp010 kernel: [559018.459705] NMI watchdog: BUG: soft
lockup - CPU#2 stuck for 22s!
On 27/09/14 18:59, Hugo Mills wrote:
2. Duplicating NOCOW files
Are you trying to cross a mount-point with that? It works for me:
Here's a script which replicates what I'm doing:
https://gist.github.com/jamespharaoh/d693067ffd203689ebea
And here's the output when I run it:
https://gist.
From: Li RongQing
It is impossible that csum_size is larger than sizeof(long), but the codes
still add the handler for this condition, like allocate new memory, for
extension. If it becomes true someday, copying csum_size size memory to local
32bit variable found and val will overflow these two v
24 matches
Mail list logo
