-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi!
this event occoured today in the morning.
Accidentially the Archive Machine was kickt into hibernation.
After reactivating the archive Btrfs filesystem was readonly, after
rebooting the system the archive btrfs filesystem was not mountable
It seems like bad idea to use a library name (lblkid) within generic
function name. The currently used scanning library is implementation
detail and this detail should be hidden for rest of the code.
Signed-off-by: Karel Zak k...@redhat.com
---
cmds-device.c | 2 +-
cmds-filesystem.c | 2 +-
Currently btrfs uses libblkid to scan for block devices with BTRFS.
The disadvantage is that this method is expensive. The udevd maintains
information about all block devices in udev db and all devices are
probed by udevd (it's linked with libblkid). We don't have to duplicate
this thing in btrfs.
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 07:04:58PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
On 31/10/2014 17:08, Karel Zak wrote:
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 12:11:20PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
btrfs_scan_lblikd() is called by most the device related command functions.
And btrfs_scan_lblkid() is most expensive function
If filesystem holds transaction open 'current-journal_info' it should not
performs memory allocations with __GFP_FS flag enabled otherwise this result in
fs
reentarance which lead to:
1) reentrance to itself : deadlock or internal assertion failure due to
incorrect journal credits
1) entrance to
Dmitry Monakhov dmonak...@openvz.org writes:
If filesystem holds transaction open 'current-journal_info' it should not
performs memory allocations with __GFP_FS flag enabled otherwise this result
in fs
reentarance which lead to:
1) reentrance to itself : deadlock or internal assertion
Currently btrfs uses libblkid to scan for block devices with BTRFS.
The disadvantage is that this method is expensive. The udevd maintains
information about all block devices in udev db and all devices are
probed by udevd (it's linked with libblkid). We don't have to duplicate
this thing in btrfs.
Hi
I'm gearing up to tackle the Pass fs_info instead of root project
suggested on the wiki.
I've read through the entire codebase and made note of 102 functions
which could be refactored. Three of these do not make any use of their
root argument at all, is it safe to refactor these as well?
I have the following setup:
- Two harddisks
- Both individually encrypted using LUKS
- Both combined into a btrfs using the btrfs raid1 feature
- The above duplicated twice:
- /dev/mapper/data1 and /dev/mapper/data2 - /mnt/data
- /dev/mapper/secdata1 and /dev/mapper/secdata2 -
The below is a hard disk going bad or other systematic problem at the
hardware level (controller card, interrupt conflict, etc).
In fact, given ata6.00: irq_stat 0x0800, interface fatal error its
pretty much a smoking gun about your controller.
Since you just upgraded your kernel I'd
On Nov 11, 2014, at 8:51 AM, Florian Bruhin m...@the-compiler.org wrote:
I have the following setup:
- Two harddisks
- Both individually encrypted using LUKS
- Both combined into a btrfs using the btrfs raid1 feature
- The above duplicated twice:
- /dev/mapper/data1 and
Hello,
I upgraded my kernel from 3.15.10 to 3.17.2 and after a while, btrfs kworkers
started to read/write data at maximum speed for hours whereas I was doing
nothing. So I rebooted with kernel 3.15.10 and hopefully everything went back
to normal. Later attempts to upgrade to 3.16.7 or 3.17.2
On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 3:10 PM, Julien Muchembled j...@jmuchemb.eu
wrote:
Hello,
I upgraded my kernel from 3.15.10 to 3.17.2 and after a while, btrfs
kworkers started to read/write data at maximum speed for hours
whereas I was doing nothing. So I rebooted with kernel 3.15.10 and
Le 11/11/14 21:30, Chris Mason a écrit :
On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 3:10 PM, Julien Muchembled j...@jmuchemb.eu wrote:
I upgraded my kernel from 3.15.10 to 3.17.2 and after a while, btrfs
kworkers started to read/write data at maximum speed for hours whereas I was
doing nothing. So I rebooted
On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 03:49:50PM +0400, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
If filesystem holds transaction open 'current-journal_info' it should not
performs memory allocations with __GFP_FS flag enabled otherwise this result
in fs
reentarance which lead to:
1) reentrance to itself : deadlock or
Juergen Sauer posted on Tue, 11 Nov 2014 12:13:41 +0100 as excerpted:
this event occoured today in the morning.
Accidentially the Archive Machine was kickt into hibernation.
After reactivating the archive Btrfs filesystem was readonly, after
rebooting the system the archive btrfs
This patch is part of a larger project to cleanup
btrfs's internal usage of struct btrfs_root. Many
functions take btrfs_root only to grab a pointer
to fs_info.
This causes programmers to ponder which root can
be passed. Since only the fs_info is read affected
functions can accept any root,
Hi,
First of all: I noticed was able to mount my partitions when doing
with a different path, which made me investigate my /etc/fstab.
It contained this:
LABEL=data1 /mnt/databtrfs
Export structs in btrfs-find-root to allow other btrfs-progs to
integrate find-root function.
This will mainly help btrfsck to search tree root if all tree root and
backup are not available.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
Makefile | 2 +-
btrfs-find-root.c | 197
Enhance btrfs-find-root in the following way:
1. Use existing or lightly modified btrfs infrastructure
Don't use btrfs-find-root local defined open_ctree or csum check.
Slightly modify open_ctree() and csum_tree_block() to provide the
chunk-only open_ctree and suprress error output for
When using btrfs check with -s option, if using '-s 2' on a small
device which doesn't have the third superblock, No valid Btrfs found
will be output, but it is not appropriate.
So check sb_bytenr against device size before scanning a device and
output proper error message.
Signed-off-by: Qu
21 matches
Mail list logo
