run_most is not used anymore.
Signed-off-by: Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com
---
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 5 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
index 222d6ae..4f54c30 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
+++
This is a regression test of
'commit fcebe4562dec (Btrfs: rework qgroup accounting)'
It can produce qgroup related warnings.
The fix is https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/5499981/
Btrfs: fix a warning of qgroup account on shared extents
Signed-off-by: Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com
Reviewed-by:
(2014/12/17 17:14), Liu Bo wrote:
run_most is not used anymore.
Signed-off-by: Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com
Reviewed-by: Satoru Takeuchi takeuchi_sat...@jp.fujitsu.com
Thanks,
Satoru
---
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 5 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git
Hi Liu,
(2014/12/17 17:30), Liu Bo wrote:
This is a regression test of
'commit fcebe4562dec (Btrfs: rework qgroup accounting)'
It can produce qgroup related warnings.
The fix is https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/5499981/
Btrfs: fix a warning of qgroup account on shared extents
Christian Robottom Reis posted on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 23:15:37 -0200 as
excerpted:
# btrfs qgroup limit 2000m 0/261 . touch x
touch: cannot touch ‘x’: Disk quota exceeded
The strange thing is that it doesn't seem to be actually out of space:
# btrfs qgroup show -p -r -e /var |
On 12/17/2014 03:52 AM, Robert White wrote:
On 12/16/2014 03:30 AM, Dongsheng Yang wrote:
Hi Robert, thanx for your proposal about this.
IMHO, output of df command shoud be more friendly to user.
Well, I think we have a disagreement on this point, let's take a look at
what the zfs is doing.
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 01:35:14PM +0100, Karel Zak wrote:
This is first step to make btrfs-progs build system more conventional
for userspace users and developers. All is implemented by small incremental
patches to keep things review-able.
Thanks. I went through the patches and haven't found
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 09:02:53PM +0100, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
enclosed a patches set to improve the output of mkfs.btrfs command.
Currently I find the output of mkfs.btrfs command quite confusing:
Thanks. I've marked the wiki://Project_ideas item as claimed.
After my patches the
On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 01:05:51PM +0100, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
The function test_num_disk_vs_raid() show an error message if
the raid profile is incompatible with the number of devices.
Unfortunately when the error is related to data profile,
the message print the metadata profile.
On Mon, 15 Dec 2014 21:02:53 +0100, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
enclosed a patches set to improve the output of mkfs.btrfs command.
This is very nice! I do have a comment about the device list:
..
UUID IDSIZEPATH
On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 03:35:09PM +0100, Merlijn Wajer wrote:
[snip]
Attached are the two patches generated with git format-patch. I am aware
that this may not be required format for submitting patches -- but
please give me some time to get used to the etiquette. :-)
Thanks, there are minor
On 2014-12-17 11:49, David Sterba wrote:
On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 03:35:09PM +0100, Merlijn Wajer wrote:
[snip]
Please let me know if musl-libc (or any other libc) is a supported
platform, and if so, if and how I can improve on said patches.
I'm not aware of non-glibc users, but I don't see
On 12/16/2014 02:58 AM, Duncan wrote:
Goffredo Baroncelli posted on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 21:02:59 +0100 as
excerpted:
+printf( Total disks size: %10s\n,
+pretty_size(total_block_count));
I really like this patch series. Makes mkfs.btrfs much nicer to
I forgoto to put in CC the mailing list
Forwarded Message
Subject: Re: [RFC][BTRFS-PROGS] Improve output of mkfs.btrfs command
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 19:57:25 +0100
From: Goffredo Baroncelli kreij...@inwind.it
Reply-To: kreij...@inwind.it
To: Holger Hoffstätte
On 12/16/2014 04:23 AM, Satoru Takeuchi wrote:
Hi Goffredo,
[...]
It removes Incompat from original message. I consider
Backward Incompatible Feature is better. I consider,
the word, incompatible, is very important for users.
Right, another good catch.
In addition, original version
Hi All,
enclosed a patches set to improve the output of mkfs.btrfs command.
Currently I find the output of mkfs.btrfs command quite confusing:
-- cut -- cut --
# mkfs.btrfs -f -M -d raid5 -m raid5 /dev/vd[b-k]
Btrfs v3.17
See http://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org for more information.
Turning ON
This is a preparation patch.
Move the group_profile_str() function from cmds-filesystem.c to utils.c
to be re-used from other modules (in this case from mkfs.c)
Signed-off-by: Goffredo Baroncelli kreij...@inwind.it
---
cmds-filesystem.c | 22 --
utils.c | 22
The function make_btrfs() has as argument the fsid of the filesystem.
If this fsid is empty or null make_btrfs() generates a new fsid. However
If the buffer is valid (but the string is empty) the generated fsid is
copied back to the caller.
Signed-off-by: Goffredo Baroncelli kreij...@inwind.it
When creating a new btrfs_device, copy the path to track it.
This path is then used by mkfs.btrfs to list all devices.
Signed-off-by: Goffredo Baroncelli kreij...@inwind.it
---
utils.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/utils.c b/utils.c
index dcb4f74..3f50e4d 100644
---
This patch prints the summary of the filesystem after the creation.
The main fileds printed are:
- devices list with their uuid, devid, path and size
- raid profile (dup,single,raid0...)
- leafsize/nodesize/sectorsize
- filesystem features (raid56, extref, mixed-bg)
- chunk size and type
If the
Add verbose option to btrfs_add_to_fsid() in order to avoid to print
the information to console when not needed.
The same information is print in the summary of the mkfs.btrfs command.
Signed-off-by: Goffredo Baroncelli kreij...@inwind.it
---
mkfs.c | 3 ++-
utils.c | 7 ---
utils.h | 2 +-
Add -v -q switches to mkfs.btrfs, to control the verbosity of mkfs.btrfs.
Signed-off-by: Goffredo Baroncelli kreij...@inwind.it
---
mkfs.c | 16 ++--
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mkfs.c b/mkfs.c
index e10e62d..a5f19cc 100644
--- a/mkfs.c
+++ b/mkfs.c
Track the size of the chunk during the filesystem creation. These information
are printed in a next patch.
Signed-off-by: Goffredo Baroncelli
---
mkfs.c | 54 +++---
1 file changed, 43 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mkfs.c b/mkfs.c
Add -v and -q switches to the mkfs.btrfs man page. These information
will be printed by a next patch in the summary.
Signed-off-by: Goffredo Baroncelli kreij...@inwind.it
---
Documentation/mkfs.btrfs.txt | 8
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/mkfs.btrfs.txt
Am Mittwoch, 17. Dezember 2014, 21:14:04 schrieb Goffredo Baroncelli:
# mkfs.btrfs -L btrfs-test -f -M -m raid5 -d raid5 /dev/vd[b-k]
BTRFS filesystem summary:
Label:btrfs-test
UUID: 4409e381-f066-4e7b-af74-b6525fefa08b
Node size:4096
Hi together,
after a btrfs was missing some csums and therefore remounted read-only,
I unmounted it and experienced
$ sudo btrfsck --init-csum-tree /dev/sde1
Creating a new CRC tree
Checking filesystem on /dev/sde1
UUID: bd6298ea-0748-45fe-87c8-eace6793ca89
Reinit crc root
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 04:30:47PM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
This is a regression test of
'commit fcebe4562dec (Btrfs: rework qgroup accounting)'
It can produce qgroup related warnings.
The fix is https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/5499981/
Btrfs: fix a warning of qgroup account on shared
I checked this for all three devices and num_devices is 4 for all of them.
The full output is below.
so now if you mount and run 'btrfs fi show mnt' that should tell
device missing, which then 'btrfs device missing mnt' should be
successful theoretically.
It may fail if you are mounting
This is nice !
Can I suggest you to take care of 'btrfs fi show' output as well :-)
it needs a similar revamp.
Earlier I tried to add group profile into the show output but that broke
xfstest cases depending on it. so just a note.
Thanks, Anand
On 18/12/2014 04:14, Goffredo Baroncelli
When we want to delete a subvol, we first check to see whether it is
a subvolume or not. After the check, we are sure that it is a valid
subvol, don't have to check its name.
Signed-off-by: Gui Hecheng guihc.f...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
cmds-subvolume.c | 15 ---
1 file changed, 15
Add two repair functions to handle 2 types of file extent error:
1. Orphan file extents
Orphan file extents are extent items whose type is DATA but its data
backref is invalid(points to non-exists).
This kind of corruption can occur when fs tree is corrupted but extent
tree stay fine.
The repair
In some fs tree leaf/node corruption case, file extents may be lost, but
in extent tree, its record may still exists.
This provide the possiblity for such orphan file extents to be
recovered even we can't recover its compression and other info, we can
still insert it as a normal non-compression
Record every file extent discontinuous hole in inode_record using a
rb_tree member.
Before the patch, btrfsck will only record the first file extent hole by
using first_extent_gap, that's good for detecting error, but not
suitable for fixing it.
This patch provides the ability to record every
Since orphan extents are handled in previous patches, now just punch
holes to fill the file extents hole.
Also since now btrfsck is aware of whether the inode has orphan file
extent, allow repair_inode_no_item() to determine filetype according to
orphan file extent.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
Add btrfs_get_extent() adn btrfs_punch_hole() for btrfs-progs.
Btrfs_get_extent() will act much like kernel one, return the first
extent that covers the given range.
The difference will be that progs btrfs_get_extent() can't handle
no-holes feature, which means caller should handle it carefully.
Before this patch, when a extent's data ref points to a invalid key in
fs tree, this happens if a leaf/node of fs tree is corrupted, btrfsck
can't do any repair and just exit.
In fact, such problem can be handled in fs tree repair routines, rebuild
the inode item(if missing) and add back the
I don't disagree with the _ideal_ of your patch. I just think that it's
impossible to implement it without lying to the user or making things
just as bad in a different way. I would _like_ you to be right. But my
thing is finding and quantifying failure cases and the entire question
is full of
On 12/16/2014 01:05 AM, Hugo Mills wrote:
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 07:47:06PM -0800, Robert White wrote:
I prefer slice, not that I am totally happy with that word either.
But by the time you get through loopback devices, memory map
devices, the device files that represent parts of partitioned
From: Satoru Takeuchi takeuchi_sat...@jp.fujitsu.com
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 14:35:22 +0900
@tmp is freed even if its allocation fails.
Signed-off-by: Satoru Takeuchi takeuchi_sat...@jp.fujitsu.com
---
cmds-property.c | 13 +++--
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff
From: Satoru Takeuchi takeuchi_sat...@jp.fujitsu.com
When / is Btrfs, btrfs property subcommand / regards it
as non-root by mistake.
check_is_root() regards @object as a file system root if
the following two conditions are satisfied.
a) Both @object and its parent directory are Btrfs object
On Thu, 2014-12-18 at 15:09 +0900, Satoru Takeuchi wrote:
From: Satoru Takeuchi takeuchi_sat...@jp.fujitsu.com
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 14:35:22 +0900
@tmp is freed even if its allocation fails.
Signed-off-by: Satoru Takeuchi takeuchi_sat...@jp.fujitsu.com
---
cmds-property.c | 13
On Thu, 2014-12-18 at 15:42 +0900, Satoru Takeuchi wrote:
From: Satoru Takeuchi takeuchi_sat...@jp.fujitsu.com
When / is Btrfs, btrfs property subcommand / regards it
as non-root by mistake.
check_is_root() regards @object as a file system root if
the following two conditions are
On 2014/12/18 16:03, Gui Hecheng wrote:
On Thu, 2014-12-18 at 15:09 +0900, Satoru Takeuchi wrote:
From: Satoru Takeuchi takeuchi_sat...@jp.fujitsu.com
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 14:35:22 +0900
@tmp is freed even if its allocation fails.
Signed-off-by: Satoru Takeuchi
On 2014/12/18 16:09, Gui Hecheng wrote:
On Thu, 2014-12-18 at 15:42 +0900, Satoru Takeuchi wrote:
From: Satoru Takeuchi takeuchi_sat...@jp.fujitsu.com
When / is Btrfs, btrfs property subcommand / regards it
as non-root by mistake.
check_is_root() regards @object as a file system root if
the
From: Satoru Takeuchi takeuchi_sat...@jp.fujitsu.com
When / is Btrfs, btrfs property subcommand / regards it
as non-root by mistake.
check_is_root() regards @object as a file system root if
the following two conditions are satisfied.
a) Both @object and its parent directory are Btrfs object
45 matches
Mail list logo
