This is one way to fix a long hang during mounts. There's probably a
better way, but this is the one I've used to get my filesystems up
and running.
We start the cleaner kthread first because the transaction kthread wants
to wake up the cleaner kthread. We start the transaction kthread next
beca
On Sun, May 01, 2016 at 08:19:44AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 30 2016, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > Indeed, blocking the superblock shrinker in reclaim is a key part of
> > balancing inode cache pressure in XFS. If the shrinker starts
> > hitting dirty inodes, it blocks on cleaning them, ther
On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 09:12:01AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>
>
> Liu Bo wrote on 2016/05/02 11:15 -0700:
> >To prevent fuzz filesystem images from panic the whole system,
> >we need various validation checks to refuse to mount such an image
> >if btrfs finds any invalid value during loading chunk
On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 09:02:56AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>
>
> Liu Bo wrote on 2016/05/02 11:15 -0700:
> >This adds valid checks for super_total_bytes, super_bytes_used and
> >super_stripesize.
> >
> >Reported-by: Vegard Nossum
> >Reported-by: Quentin Casasnovas
> >Signed-off-by: Liu Bo
> >-
On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 01:53:02PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
>
>
>
> On 05/03/2016 02:15 AM, Liu Bo wrote:
> >To prevent fuzz filesystem images from panic the whole system,
> >we need various validation checks to refuse to mount such an image
> >if btrfs finds any invalid value during loading chu
While here can also integrate this.
[PATCH 1/1] btrfs: fix lock dep warning move scratch super outside of
chunk_mutex
That one has been in for-next for some time.
There is another patch which is similarly named (sorry about that),
I see that one but not this.
-
git log -i --a
On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 01:14:27AM +0200, Holger Hoffstätte wrote:
> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 1:01 AM, Liu Bo wrote:
> > Mounting a btrfs can resume previous balance operations asynchronously.
> > An user got a crash when one drive has some corrupt sectors.
> >
> > Since balance can cancel itself in
On Wed, May 04 2016, Michal Hocko wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun 01-05-16 07:55:31, NeilBrown wrote:
> [...]
>> One particular problem with your process-context idea is that it isn't
>> inherited across threads.
>> Steve Whitehouse's example in gfs shows how allocation dependencies can
>> even cross into
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 1:01 AM, Liu Bo wrote:
> Mounting a btrfs can resume previous balance operations asynchronously.
> An user got a crash when one drive has some corrupt sectors.
>
> Since balance can cancel itself in case of any error, we can gracefully
> return errors to upper layers and let
mchri...@redhat.com writes:
> The following patches begin to cleanup the request->cmd_flags and
> bio->bi_rw mess. We currently use cmd_flags to specify the operation,
> attributes and state of the request. For bi_rw we use it for similar
> info and also the priority but then also have another bi_
On 2016-05-02 20:33, Yauhen Kharuzhy wrote:
> Hi.
>
> While testing of various scenarios of RAID5 recovery I got kernel
> messages about bad page state with soft lockup afterwards.
Looking at your script, I found a little bug:
[...]
for i in `seq $n -1 $((n-2))`; do
d=`basename ${DISKS[$
On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 11:34:50PM +0300, Yauhen Kharuzhy wrote:
> On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 07:31:48PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 06:24:10PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
> > > Yauhen reported in the ML that s_bdev is null at mount, and
> > > s_bdev gets updated to some device
On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 07:31:48PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 06:24:10PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
> > Yauhen reported in the ML that s_bdev is null at mount, and
> > s_bdev gets updated to some device when missing device is
> > replaced, as because bdev is null for missing
2016-04-30 13:28 GMT+02:00 Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net>:
> Alexander Fougner posted on Sat, 30 Apr 2016 12:55:06 +0200 as excerpted:
>
Receive side only outputs this:
sudo btrfs check -p /dev/sdc Couldn't open file system
>>>
>>> It wasn't mounted at the time, right?
>>
>> Nope
>>
>>
>>>
Den 03/05/16 kl. 20:31 skrev ha...@hagenjohansen.dk:
> Den 03/05/16 kl. 18:30 skrev Duncan:
>> Hugo Mills posted on Tue, 03 May 2016 10:27:46 + as excerpted:
>>
>>> Given those symptoms (mount doesn't report errors, but no mount
>>> happens), I would guess that your problem is with systemd. It
Den 03/05/16 kl. 18:30 skrev Duncan:
> Hugo Mills posted on Tue, 03 May 2016 10:27:46 + as excerpted:
>
>> Given those symptoms (mount doesn't report errors, but no mount
>> happens), I would guess that your problem is with systemd. It has a bug
>> where it sometimes unmounts things immediatel
On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 04:06:05AM +, Paul Jones wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: linux-btrfs-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-btrfs-
> > ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Omar Sandoval
> > Sent: Tuesday, 3 May 2016 8:06 AM
> > To: Stefan Priebe
> > Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.ker
Den 03/05/16 kl. 13:13 skrev Hasse Hagen Johansen:
>>>
>>> The exact thing I did was having the subvols mounted. Then mounted
>> top-level volume on /mbt/temp. And then ran balance to convert to
>> raid1.. When finished I umounted /mnt/temp (the top-level) and then my
>> 3 subvolumes was unmounted
On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 06:01:31PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
>
>
> On 05/02/2016 11:26 PM, David Sterba wrote:
> > On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 07:02:08AM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
> >> --- a/fs/btrfs/dev-replace.c
> >> +++ b/fs/btrfs/dev-replace.c
> >> @@ -569,11 +569,9 @@ static int btrfs_dev_replace_
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 06:24:10PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
> Yauhen reported in the ML that s_bdev is null at mount, and
> s_bdev gets updated to some device when missing device is
> replaced, as because bdev is null for missing device, things
> gets matched up. Fix this by checking if s_bdev is s
Hugo Mills posted on Tue, 03 May 2016 10:27:46 + as excerpted:
> Given those symptoms (mount doesn't report errors, but no mount
> happens), I would guess that your problem is with systemd. It has a bug
> where it sometimes unmounts things immediately after you've mounted
> them.
FWIW, I have
A user reports that some commands fail with SIGBUS on SPARC, due to unaligned
access. We should really use the helpers as the search header data are read
from a random position in the buffer that's returned from the TREE_SEARCH
ioctl.
David Sterba (3):
btrfs-progs: kerncompat: introduce get_unal
Signed-off-by: David Sterba
---
kerncompat.h | 4
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kerncompat.h b/kerncompat.h
index ee65aa72ad6d..574f468226c2 100644
--- a/kerncompat.h
+++ b/kerncompat.h
@@ -334,12 +334,16 @@ struct __una_u32 { __le32 x; }
__attribute__((__packed__));
struct
Generated by following semantic patch and manually tweaked.
@@
struct btrfs_ioctl_search_header *SH;
@@
(
- SH->objectid
+ btrfs_search_header_objectid(SH)
|
- SH->offset
+ btrfs_search_header_offset(SH)
|
- SH->transid
+ btrfs_search_header_transid(SH)
|
- SH->len
+ btrfs_search_header_len(SH)
|
The search header is usually accessed in an unaligned way, we could
trigger errors (SIGBUS) on architectures that do not support that.
Signed-off-by: David Sterba
---
ctree.h | 26 ++
1 file changed, 26 insertions(+)
diff --git a/ctree.h b/ctree.h
index 2da6f7786a78..13e
Austin S. Hemmelgarn posted on Mon, 02 May 2016 09:13:41 -0400 as
excerpted:
>> Direct from that section of my /etc/sysctl.conf:
>>
>>
>> # write-cache, foreground/background flushing
>> # vm.dirty_ratio = 10 (% of RAM)
>> # make it 3% of 16G ~ half a gig
>> vm.dirty_ratio = 3
>> # vm.dirty_byt
Hi,
On Sun 01-05-16 07:55:31, NeilBrown wrote:
[...]
> One particular problem with your process-context idea is that it isn't
> inherited across threads.
> Steve Whitehouse's example in gfs shows how allocation dependencies can
> even cross into user space.
Hmm, I am still not sure I understand t
Ok. Thanks for the info. I will look into it some more and return when I find
out what happens. Thanks for the help until now
On 3. maj 2016 12.27.46 CEST, Hugo Mills wrote:
>On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 12:24:52PM +0200, Hasse Hagen Johansen wrote:
>> Ok. I can mount it manually just fine now usin
On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 12:24:52PM +0200, Hasse Hagen Johansen wrote:
> Ok. I can mount it manually just fine now using this command : sudo mount -t
> btrfs -o subvol=music /dev/sde /mnt/temp
>
> But somehow I cannot mount it at /music anymore(and I just found out that is
> what has been tricki
Ok. I can mount it manually just fine now using this command : sudo mount -t
btrfs -o subvol=music /dev/sde /mnt/temp
But somehow I cannot mount it at /music anymore(and I just found out that is
what has been tricking me)
I have also tried with this in fstab
/dev/sde /music btrfs
On 05/02/2016 11:26 PM, David Sterba wrote:
On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 07:02:08AM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
--- a/fs/btrfs/dev-replace.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/dev-replace.c
@@ -569,11 +569,9 @@ static int btrfs_dev_replace_finishing(struct
btrfs_fs_info *fs_info,
ASSERT(list_empty(&src_device->r
On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 10:52:36AM +0200, Hasse Hagen Johansen wrote:
> Hi
>
> I have made a btrfs on a single physical disk and made 3 subvolumes which I
> manually mounted and copied data to. Yesterday I added another disk to the
> filesystem and ran btrfs balance start -mconvert=raid1 -dconve
On Sat, Apr 30, 2016 at 1:25 AM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Pierre-Matthieu anglade posted on Fri, 29 Apr 2016 11:24:12 + as
> excerpted:
> So while btrfs in general, being still not yet fully stable, isn't yet
> really recommended unless you're using data you can afford to lose,
>
Creates helper fucntion as needed by the device delete
and replace operations. Also now it checks if the next
device being assigned is an active device.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain
---
v3: fix compile warning, use ASSERT, minor comment update, based on for-next
v2: added comments, and BUG_ON if w
Hi
I have made a btrfs on a single physical disk and made 3 subvolumes which I
manually mounted and copied data to. Yesterday I added another disk to the
filesystem and ran btrfs balance start -mconvert=raid1 -dconvert=raid1
/mnt/temp where /mnt/temp is top-level fimesystem(not the subvolumes).
"Honestly, did you read the Debian wiki pages for btrfs and EFI? If
you read them, could you please let me know where they were deficient
so I can fix them?"
I did not use the Debian wiki pages for BTRFS and UEFI as a resource
in my attempts to answer my questions because I read them in the past
36 matches
Mail list logo
