read_tree_block may take a reference on the 'eb', a following
free_extent_buffer is necessary.
Signed-off-by: Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com
---
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
index 8b353ad..bb8a221 100644
The return value of read_tree_block() can confuse callers as it always
returns NULL for either -ENOMEM or -EIO, so it's likely that callers
parse it to a wrong error, for instance, in btrfs_read_tree_root().
This fixes the above issue.
Signed-off-by: Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com
---
This is based
read_tree_block may take a reference on the 'eb', a following
free_extent_buffer is necessary.
Signed-off-by: Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com
---
This is based on the latest for-linus-4.1.
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 01:50:55PM +0100, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
First fix == bashism, as that is not accepted by e.g. Debian/Ubuntu
dash.
Secondly shift OPTIND, such that last parameter is checked to exist.
Signed-off-by: Dimitri John Ledkov dimitri.j.led...@intel.com
---
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 02:31:56PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 05:16:40PM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
read_tree_block may take a reference on the 'eb', a following
free_extent_buffer is necessary.
Signed-off-by: Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com
Reviewed-by: David Sterba
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 05:16:40PM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
read_tree_block may take a reference on the 'eb', a following
free_extent_buffer is necessary.
Signed-off-by: Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com
Reviewed-by: David Sterba dste...@suse.cz
And I've spotted one more in btrfs_read_tree_root and 2
On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 09:42:19PM -0500, Anthony Plack wrote:
Would I step on anyone’s toes if I started submitting some extra
patches to increase the verbosity of the BTRFS code in the kernel log?
I would probably start with most things as pr_debug just to keep it
quiet on non-debug
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 09:01:23AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Add the following tree block check to avoid memory corruption on hostile
image:
1) Check level.
Level = BTRFS_MAX_LEVEL won't be read out.
2) Nritems.
For nr_items max_nritems, the tree_block won't be read out.
Max nritems is
On May 25, 2015, at 7:57 AM, David Sterba dste...@suse.cz wrote:
On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 09:42:19PM -0500, Anthony Plack wrote:
Would I step on anyone’s toes if I started submitting some extra
patches to increase the verbosity of the BTRFS code in the kernel log?
I would probably start
On May 24, 2015, at 11:00 PM, Gareth Pye gar...@cerberos.id.au wrote:
2.
18% or 1.1T spare currently. That isn't what I'd call tiny free space.
--
# btrfs fi df /data
Data, RAID1: total=4.43TiB, used=4.41TiB
Of 4.43TiB, btrfs believes you have used 4.41TiB.
Chris’s fix to this has
Hello,
I have a RAID5 filesystem where one disk has crashed. Now the filesystem is not
recognized any more. Any help available?
Here is some info:
root@server:~# uname -a
Linux server 4.0.0-1-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 4.0.2-1 (2015-05-11) x86_64 GNU/Linux
root@server:~# btrfs --version
btrfs-progs
Hi!
I need to boot with dracut to get my btrfs root partition properly
initialized (because it is a multi-device btrfs). Today, after upgrading to
systemd v220, I tracked a booting issue down to what looks like a general
problem with the btrfs udev rules distributed with systemd:
If I drop
After a full balance that is likely to change to 4.41TiB used of
4.41TiB total. Is that going to help anything, Peter is saying it's a
known bug that convert can't do anything currently.
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 2:36 AM, Anthony Plack t...@plack.net wrote:
On May 24, 2015, at 11:00 PM, Gareth
Looks like it's in 4.1rc5.
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git/commit/?h=for-linus-4.1id=153c35b60c72de9fae06c8e2c8b2c47d79d4
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More
Felix Koop posted on Mon, 25 May 2015 18:06:20 +0200 as excerpted:
I have a RAID5 filesystem where one disk has crashed. Now the filesystem
is not recognized any more. Any help available?
Here is some info:
root@server:~# uname -a Linux server 4.0.0-1-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 4.0.2-1
Hello,
I have a RAID5 filesystem where one disk has crashed. Now the filesystem is not
recognized any more. Any help available?
Here is some info:
root@server:~# uname -a
Linux server 4.0.0-1-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 4.0.2-1 (2015-05-11) x86_64 GNU/Linux
root@server:~# btrfs --version
btrfs-progs
16 matches
Mail list logo