On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 1:26 AM, Robert White wrote:
> On 11/07/2014 05:01 PM, Filipe Manana wrote:
>>
>> V2: Added missing btrfs_mark_buffer_dirty() call for the case where a
>> replace
>> happens for an item with no other xattrs and the new xattr value size
>> is
>> the same as the old
Matt McKinnon posted on Fri, 07 Nov 2014 09:33:44 -0500 as excerpted:
> I'm running into some corruption and I wanted to seek out advice on
> whether or not to run btrfs check --repair, or if I should fall back to
> my backup file server, or both.
>
> The system is mountable, and usable.
>
> # u
On 8 November 2014 02:55, James Hogarth wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a F20 system with BTRFS on a 4 disk RAID1 profile
>
> One of the disks failed the other day and when I was replacing it
> today I think a scheduled snapshot was attempted - the following
> appeared in the logs and any btrfs commands l
Hi,
I have a F20 system with BTRFS on a 4 disk RAID1 profile
One of the disks failed the other day and when I was replacing it
today I think a scheduled snapshot was attempted - the following
appeared in the logs and any btrfs commands locked up.
I don't know if the snapshot was relate dor not b
Cyril Scetbon posted on Fri, 07 Nov 2014 20:06:40 +0100 as excerpted:
> I've made some tests with a newer version of btrfs, and I still have
> issues :(
>
> http://pastebin.com/cycu08LG
>
> I have 2 directories with quotas and a parent qgroup. All have quotas
> limits but something goes wrong. W
On 11/07/2014 05:01 PM, Filipe Manana wrote:
V2: Added missing btrfs_mark_buffer_dirty() call for the case where a replace
happens for an item with no other xattrs and the new xattr value size is
the same as the old xattr value size;
Made btrfs_search_slot not release the path if i
Replacing a xattr consists of doing a lookup for its existing value, delete
the current value from the respective leaf, release the search path and then
finally insert the new value. This leaves a time window where readers (getxattr,
listxattrs) won't see any value for the xattr. Xattrs are used to
really nice fix. Thanks Gui.
Anand
On 08/11/2014 02:16, David Sterba wrote:
On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at 10:07:43AM +0800, Gui Hecheng wrote:
The @fi_args->num_devices in @get_fs_info() does not include seed devices.
We could just correct it by searching the chunk tree and count how
many dev_items
On Fri, 2014-11-07 at 15:21 -0500, Chris Mason wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Omar Sandoval
> wrote:
> > The RCU-friendly string API used internally by BTRFS is generic
> > enough for
> > common use. This doesn't add any new functionality, but instead just
> > moves the
> > code an
On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 8:54 PM, Chris Mason wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Filipe Manana wrote:
>>
>> Replacing a xattr consists of doing a lookup for its existing value,
>> delete
>> the current value from the respective leaf, release the search path and
>> then
>> finally insert t
On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Filipe Manana wrote:
Replacing a xattr consists of doing a lookup for its existing value,
delete
the current value from the respective leaf, release the search path
and then
finally insert the new value. This leaves a time window where readers
(getxattr,
listx
This test verifies that replacing a xattr's value is an atomic
operation. This is motivated by an issue in btrfs where replacing
a xattr's value wasn't an atomic operation, it consisted of
removing the old value and then inserting the new value in a
btree. This made readers (getxattr and listxattrs
Replacing a xattr consists of doing a lookup for its existing value, delete
the current value from the respective leaf, release the search path and then
finally insert the new value. This leaves a time window where readers (getxattr,
listxattrs) won't see any value for the xattr. Xattrs are used to
On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Omar Sandoval
wrote:
The RCU-friendly string API used internally by BTRFS is generic
enough for
common use. This doesn't add any new functionality, but instead just
moves the
code and documents the existing API.
Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett
Acked-by: Paul E.
On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 09:52:18PM +0100, Cyril Scetbon wrote:
> oh cool to know !
>
> It's weird that the man page says "limits are never enforced on the superuser
> (nor are they enforced for group and project ID zero)"
>
> http://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/trusty/en/man8/xfs_quota.8.html
T
The RCU-friendly string API used internally by BTRFS is generic enough for
common use. This doesn't add any new functionality, but instead just moves the
code and documents the existing API.
Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett
Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Omar Sandoval
---
Chris, could you
Hi guys,
I've made some tests with a newer version of btrfs, and I still have issues :(
http://pastebin.com/cycu08LG
I have 2 directories with quotas and a parent qgroup. All have quotas limits
but something goes wrong. When the parent limit is exceeded I have a "Disk
quota exceeded" which is
On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at 10:07:43AM +0800, Gui Hecheng wrote:
> The @fi_args->num_devices in @get_fs_info() does not include seed devices.
> We could just correct it by searching the chunk tree and count how
> many dev_items there are in total which includes seed devices.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gui Hec
On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at 10:07:41AM +0800, Gui Hecheng wrote:
> +static int no_seed_devices(struct btrfs_fs_devices *fs_devices)
Please reverse the meaning of the function, ie. something like
'has_seed_devices'. It's more natural to deal with negation operators
when they're explicit rather than hid
A quick check that everything still builds.
Signed-off-by: David Sterba
---
Makefile | 7 +++
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
index 99b03658a406..126dc593ddfb 100644
--- a/Makefile
+++ b/Makefile
@@ -248,6 +248,13 @@ library-test.static: $(libs_static) libra
Remove duplicate files, add extra progs, add library test binaries.
Signed-off-by: David Sterba
---
Makefile | 8
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
index b597ad8e9b89..4cae30c179b5 100644
--- a/Makefile
+++ b/Makefile
@@ -266,12 +266,12 @@
Basic test based on snapper code that uses the send stream API.
Signed-off-by: David Sterba
---
Makefile | 8 +++
library-test.c | 69 ++
2 files changed, 77 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 library-test.c
diff --git a/Makefile
Add them to build test and to clean rules.
Signed-off-by: David Sterba
---
Makefile | 7 ++-
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
index 126dc593ddfb..b597ad8e9b89 100644
--- a/Makefile
+++ b/Makefile
@@ -50,6 +50,9 @@ progs = mkfs.btrfs btrfs-debug
Signed-off-by: David Sterba
---
.gitignore | 4
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore
index fc8c07a22f7f..e637b170714b 100644
--- a/.gitignore
+++ b/.gitignore
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
*.o
*.static.o
*.o.d
+tags
.cc-defines.h
version.h
version
@@ -30,8 +31,11 @@
We've managed to break build of snapper two times now, a new make rule
'test-build' should help us to check the build. Static build is not required to
pass due to dependency on static libs that may not be widely available.
David Sterba (5):
btrfs-progs: build, add basic build test for library
There's a pointer to buffer, integer offset and offset passed as
pointer, try to find matching names for them.
Signed-off-by: David Sterba
---
fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 31 ---
1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/vo
Verify that possible minimum and maximum size is set, validity of
contents is checked in btrfs_read_sys_array.
Signed-off-by: David Sterba
---
fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 19 +++
1 file changed, 19 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
index e97fa11488f1..7
I received a few crafted images from Jiri, all got through the recently
added superblock checks. The lower bounds checks for num_devices and
sector/node -sizes were missing and caused a crash during mount.
Tools for symbolic code execution were used to prepare the images
contents.
Reported-by: Ji
Verify that the sys_array has enough bytes to read the next item.
Signed-off-by: David Sterba
---
fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 26 +++---
1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
index fbdfed2e0ba8..92f4f011882e 100644
---
This series adds more superblock checks that turned out not to be enough after
"btrfs: add more superblock checks". Would be good to get them into 3.18 as I'd
like to submit them to stable kernels as well. This is not easily possible
right now as it depends on a patch that's not merged yet (mention
Hi All,
I'm running into some corruption and I wanted to seek out advice on
whether or not to run btrfs check --repair, or if I should fall back to
my backup file server, or both.
The system is mountable, and usable.
# uname -a
Linux cbmm-fs 3.17.2-custom #1 SMP Thu Oct 30 14:09:57 EDT 2014
On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 12:15 PM, Filipe Manana wrote:
> When attempting to insert a new dir_item, we were calling btrfs_extent_item()
> without checking if the leaf has enough space to extend the item. This made
> btrfs_extent_item() crash through a BUG() call.
> Therefore do the check and return
When attempting to insert a new dir_item, we were calling btrfs_extent_item()
without checking if the leaf has enough space to extend the item. This made
btrfs_extent_item() crash through a BUG() call.
Therefore do the check and return ENOSPC if the leaf doesn't have enough space.
Signed-off-by: F
On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 12:37 AM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> A few days ago, I started using rsync batches to archive old copies of
> ceph OSD snapshots for certain kinds of disaster recovery. This seems
> to exercise an unexpected race condition in rsync, which happens to
> expose what appears to b
On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 23:39:02 -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> [dropping rs...@lists.samba.org, it rejects posts from non-subscribers;
> refer to https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10925 instead]
>
> On Nov 6, 2014, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
>> What makes the problem visible is that btrf
35 matches
Mail list logo
