[PATCH v3] Btrfs: Show a warning message if one of objectid reaches its highest value

It's better to show a warning message for the exceptional case that one of objectid (in most case, inode number) reaches its highest value. For example, if inode cache is off and this event happens, we can't create any file even if there are not so many files. This message ease detecting such

Re: [PATCH v2] Btrfs: Show a warning message if one of objectid reaches its highest value

On 2016/03/09 11:32, Naohiro Aota wrote: 2016-03-07 12:05 GMT+09:00 Satoru Takeuchi : - It's better to show a warning message for the exceptional case that one of objectid (in most case, inode number) reaches its highest value. Show this message only once

Re: [PATCH v2] Btrfs: Show a warning message if one of objectid reaches its highest value

On 2016/03/09 4:24, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote: > On 2016-03-07 04:05, Satoru Takeuchi wrote: >> - It's better to show a warning message for the exceptional case >> that one of objectid (in most case, inode number) reaches its >> highest value. Show this message only once to avoid filling

Re: [PATCH v2] Btrfs: Show a warning message if one of objectid reaches its highest value

2016-03-07 12:05 GMT+09:00 Satoru Takeuchi : > - It's better to show a warning message for the exceptional case > that one of objectid (in most case, inode number) reaches its > highest value. Show this message only once to avoid filling > dmesg with it. > -

[PATCH] btrfs-progs: util: Fix a wrong unit of pretty_size

If parameter for pretty_size is smaller than default base(1024), pretty_size() will output wrong unit. For example, pretty_size(1008) will output '0.98B' not '1008B' or '0.98KiB'. The cause is, for default base and auto-detect unit, base will be 1024 but num_divs is still 0, last result will

Re: [PATCH] Documentation: btrfs: remove usage specific information

On 2016/03/09 2:04, David Sterba wrote: > The document in the kernel sources is yet another palce where the > documentation would need to be updated, while it is not the primary > source. We actively maintain the wiki pages. > > Signed-off-by: David Sterba > --- >

[PATCH] Fix broken 'device scan' arguments parsing

commit 52179e4fea41e55f31c92cd033a0b53a5107b4f4 'btrfs-progs: unify argc min/max checking' brokes 'btrfs device scan' command when no argument was given. Fix this. Signed-off-by: Yauhen Kharuzhy --- cmds-device.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1

Re: Btrfsck memory usage reduce idea

On 2016/03/08 17:46, Qu Wenruo wrote: Satoru Takeuchi wrote on 2016/03/08 17:28 +0900: Hi Qu, On 2016/03/07 14:42, Qu Wenruo wrote: Hi, As many have already known, "btrfs check" is a memory eater. The problem is, btrfsck checks extent tree in a very comprehensive method. 1) Create

Re: btrfs and containers

On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 12:58 PM, Liu Bo wrote: > On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 04:45:09PM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Tobias Hunger >> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > I have been running systemd-nspawn containers on top of a

Re: btrfs and containers

On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 04:45:09PM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Tobias Hunger wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I have been running systemd-nspawn containers on top of a btrfs > > filesystem for a while now. > > > > This works great: Snapshots are a

Re: [PATCH v2] Btrfs: Show a warning message if one of objectid reaches its highest value

On 2016-03-07 04:05, Satoru Takeuchi wrote: > - It's better to show a warning message for the exceptional case >that one of objectid (in most case, inode number) reaches its >highest value. Show this message only once to avoid filling >dmesg with it. > - EOVERFLOW is more proper return

[PATCH] Documentation: btrfs: remove usage specific information

The document in the kernel sources is yet another palce where the documentation would need to be updated, while it is not the primary source. We actively maintain the wiki pages. Signed-off-by: David Sterba --- Documentation/filesystems/btrfs.txt | 261

Re: btrfs-progs and btrfs(8) inconsistencies

Let me answer here for the whole thread. There are lot of issues to cover, I think the github way would work here, so the project you've created for the purpose seems ok to me. https://github.com/btrfs8-revamp I assume way more dicussions than actual patches and coding, the web platform offers

[PATCH][btrfs-progs] populate fs with small dataset for convert-tests

Signed-off-by: Lakshmipathi.G --- tests/convert-tests.sh | 84 +++--- 1 file changed, 80 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/tests/convert-tests.sh b/tests/convert-tests.sh index 0bfb41f..c1f3de0 100644 ---

Re: [PATCH 1/2] Btrfs: make mapping->writeback_index point to the last written page

On 03/08/16 01:56, Liu Bo wrote: > If sequential writer is writing in the middle of the page and it just > redirties > the last written page by continuing from it. > > In the above case this can end up with seeking back to that firstly redirtied > page after writing all the pages at the end of

Re: btrfs and containers

On 2016-03-07 17:55, Tobias Hunger wrote: Hi, I have been running systemd-nspawn containers on top of a btrfs filesystem for a while now. This works great: Snapshots are a huge help to manage containers! But today I ran btrfs subvol list . *inside* a container. To my surprise I got a list of

Re: Btrfsck memory usage reduce idea

Satoru Takeuchi wrote on 2016/03/08 17:28 +0900: Hi Qu, On 2016/03/07 14:42, Qu Wenruo wrote: Hi, As many have already known, "btrfs check" is a memory eater. The problem is, btrfsck checks extent tree in a very comprehensive method. 1) Create extent_ref for each extent item with backref

Re: Btrfsck memory usage reduce idea

Hi Qu, On 2016/03/07 14:42, Qu Wenruo wrote: Hi, As many have already known, "btrfs check" is a memory eater. The problem is, btrfsck checks extent tree in a very comprehensive method. 1) Create extent_ref for each extent item with backref 2) Iterate all other trees to add extent ref 3) If