From: Justin Maggard jmaggar...@gmail.com
Error messages saying, basically, you don't have enough
free space to free up space make people angry.
Sure, there are workarounds like truncating a file before
removing it; but it's certainly not obvious. Unlink has a
special case if we cannot make our
On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 02:59:54PM +0530, Chandan Rajendra wrote:
max_to_defrag represents the number of pages to defrag rather than the last
page of the file range to be defragged. Fix this.
Please update the changelog and describe the buggy behaviour. From a
brief look I think that the defrag
On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 05:19:14PM -0700, Omar Sandoval wrote:
I also can't figure out what that shrink_dcache_sb() is doing there.
d_invalidate() already prunes the dentry cache under the deleted
subvolume, but this clears the dcache for the whole filesystem, which
could incur unnecessary
On 2015/06/03 15:57, Dongsheng Yang wrote:
Currently, we can only set a limitation on a qgroup, but we
can not clear it.
This patch provide a choice to user to clear a limitation on
qgroup by passing a value of CLEAR_VALUE(-1) to kernel.
Reported-by: Tsutomu Itoh t-i...@jp.fujitsu.com
On 2015/06/03 15:57, Dongsheng Yang wrote:
Currently, we can not clear a limitation on a qgroup. Although
there is a 'none' choice provided to user to do it, it does not
work well.
It does not set the flag which user want to clear, then kernel
will never know what the user want to do at
Add a check to error out in the following case:
# ./btrfs qgroup limit T /mnt/
Invalid size argument given
Without this patch, btrfs-progs would parse the input as 0
and continue.
Signed-off-by: Dongsheng Yang yangds.f...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
cmds-qgroup.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3
There are two understanding of the '0' value in btrfs qgroup show.
(1) is no-limitation on this qgroup. (2) is the max-limitation is 0.
This patch make it showing in different way.
(1). max-limitation for 0 is still showing '0'.
(2). no-limitation will show 'none'.
qgroupid rfer
Currently, we can not clear a limitation on a qgroup. Although
there is a 'none' choice provided to user to do it, it does not
work well.
It does not set the flag which user want to clear, then kernel
will never know what the user want to do at all.
*Without this commit*
# ./btrfs qgroup show
Currently, we can only set a limitation on a qgroup, but we
can not clear it.
This patch provide a choice to user to clear a limitation on
qgroup by passing a value of CLEAR_VALUE(-1) to kernel.
Reported-by: Tsutomu Itoh t-i...@jp.fujitsu.com
Signed-off-by: Dongsheng Yang
On 06/02/2015 11:12 PM, David Sterba wrote:
On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 02:25:17PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
kernel is already checking it (rightly), we don't need to check that in the
user land.
Sometimes it's useful to duplicate the checks in userspace because we
can fail early and return the
If we pass a negative value to command qgroup limit, btrfs-progs
would convert it to unsigned long long silently. That's a little
confusing to user, why I can limit my quota to a negative value.
This patch add a check in parse_limit, if the input value is negative,
error out to user.
When we enable quota, btrfs will rescan quota numbers. We need
to wait the rescan finished before any more operations on btrfs
qgroups. Otherwith, the new btrfs-progs would WARN out:
WARNING: Rescan is running, qgroup data may be incorrect.
It would make btrfs/022 failed.
Signed-off-by:
On 2015/06/03 15:57, Dongsheng Yang wrote:
There are two understanding of the '0' value in btrfs qgroup show.
(1) is no-limitation on this qgroup. (2) is the max-limitation is 0.
This patch make it showing in different way.
(1). max-limitation for 0 is still showing '0'.
(2).
Hi Filip,
Qu is off duty this week, would you please try this patch here?
Thanx
Yang
On 06/03/2015 03:10 PM, Dongsheng Yang wrote:
When we enable quota, btrfs will rescan quota numbers. We need
to wait the rescan finished before any more operations on btrfs
qgroups. Otherwith, the new
On 06/03/2015 04:40 PM, Tsutomu Itoh wrote:
On 2015/06/03 15:57, Dongsheng Yang wrote:
Currently, we can not clear a limitation on a qgroup. Although
there is a 'none' choice provided to user to do it, it does not
work well.
It does not set the flag which user want to clear, then kernel
max_to_defrag represents the number of pages to defrag rather than the last
page of the file range to be defragged. Fix this.
Signed-off-by: Chandan Rajendra chan...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
---
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
From: Jeff Mahoney je...@suse.com
Overloading extent_map-bdev to struct map_lookup * might have started out
as a means to an end, but it's a pattern that's used all over the place
now. Let's get rid of the casting and just add a union instead.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney je...@suse.com
---
From: Jeff Mahoney je...@suse.com
When we clear the dirty bits in btrfs_delete_unused_bgs for extents
in the empty block group, it results in btrfs_finish_extent_commit being
unable to discard the freed extents.
The block group removal patch added an alternate path to forget extents
other than
The automatic block group removal patch introduced some regressions
in how discards are handled.
1/ FITRIM only iterates over block groups on disk - removed block groups
won't be trimmed.
2/ Clearing the dirty bit from extents in removed block groups means that
those extents won't be
From: Jeff Mahoney je...@suse.com
The cleaner thread may already be sleeping by the time we enter
close_ctree. If that's the case, we'll skip removing any unused
block groups queued for removal, even during a normal umount.
They'll be cleaned up automatically at next mount, but users
expect a
Bio error reporting has been a mess for a while, and the increasing
use of chained bios makes it worse.
This series attempts to add a proper error field to struct bio
to sort this out. It's working fine for me, but MD and btrfs were
doing pretty nasty things with the BIO_UPTODATE flag, so I
On Wednesday 03 Jun 2015 12:41:02 David Sterba wrote:
On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 02:59:54PM +0530, Chandan Rajendra wrote:
max_to_defrag represents the number of pages to defrag rather than the
last
page of the file range to be defragged. Fix this.
Please update the changelog and describe
Hello!
I'm experiencing a problem with a btrfs partition on my system. It
refuses to mount rw, dmesg contains this message and a stack trace [0]
when I try:
BTRFS info (device sdb1): disk space caching is enabled
I can mount the fs as readonly but then I get a bunch of these errors on
file
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 8:10 AM, Dongsheng Yang
yangds.f...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
When we enable quota, btrfs will rescan quota numbers. We need
to wait the rescan finished before any more operations on btrfs
qgroups. Otherwith, the new btrfs-progs would WARN out:
WARNING: Rescan is running,
If a directory inode is orphanized, because some inode previously
processed has a new name that collides with the old name of the current
inode, we need to check if it needs its rename operation delayed too,
as its ancestor-descendent relationship with some other inode might
have been reversed
Hi Chris,
Please pull 2 fixes for the send feature from my branch send_fixes_4.2.
Both have been around in the mailing list/patchwork before the 4.1 merge
window opened but were not picked for 4.1. They both have tests merged
in xfstests (btrfs/087 and btrfs/092), which as expected, fail without
Even though we delay the rename of directories when they become
descendents of other directories that were also renamed in the send
root to prevent infinite path build loops, we were doing it in cases
where this was not needed and was actually harmful resulting in
infinite path build loops as we
Hello
My name is Irena .A, I am sending this brief letter to solicit your
partnership to transfer €22,500,000.00 Euros,if interested kindly write
back for more information.
irenageorgia...@qq.com
Irena .A.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body
On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 10:05:30PM -0700, Omar Sandoval wrote:
Add a regression test for a problem where attempting to delete the
default subvolume would fail (as expected), but not until after all
submounts under the subvolume were unmounted.
Signed-off-by: Omar Sandoval osan...@osandov.com
The key advancing condition used in copy_to_sk() is loose. It can
advance the key even if it reaches sk-max_*: e.g. when the max key = (512,
1024, -1) and the current key = (512, 1025, 10), it increments the
offset by 1, continues hopeless search from (512, 1025, 11). This issue
make ioctl() to
David,
Kindly do not integrated this patch as of now.
As I have just found that, the error reporting when
the default background option is used is not completely
transparent. I need to fix this before this patch.
Thanks, Anand
On 06/03/2015 03:49 PM, Anand Jain wrote:
On 06/02/2015
On 06/02/2015 11:15 PM, Filipe Manana wrote:
Hi Chris,
Please pull 2 fixes for the send feature from my branch send_fixes_4.2.
Both have been around in the mailing list/patchwork before the 4.1 merge
window opened but were not picked for 4.1. They both have tests merged
in xfstests
32 matches
Mail list logo
