Re: [PULL] Btrfs fixes for 4.10

On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 03:42:50PM +0100, David Sterba wrote: Hi, a few more fixes, please pull. Thanks. Great, thanks Dave, rolling tests. -chris -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo

[GIT PULL] libnvdimm fixes for 4.10-rc5

Hi Linus, please pull from: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/nvdimm/nvdimm libnvdimm-fixes ...to receive: * A regression fix for the multiple-pmem-namespace-per-region support added in 4.9. Even if an existing environment is not using that feature the act of creating and a

[PATCH] btrfs-progs: sanitize - Use correct source for memcpy

From: Goldwyn Rodrigues While performing a memcpy, we are copying from uninitialized dst as opposed to src->data. Though using eb->len is correct, I used src->len to make it more readable. Signed-off-by: Goldwyn Rodrigues --- image/main.c | 2 +- 1 file

Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] Btrfs: incremental send, fix serval case failure

On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 04:24:54PM +0800, robbieko wrote: > From: Robbie Ko > > Patch for fix btrfs incremental send. > These patches base on v4.8.0-rc8 Is this a typo or did you really base the patches on 4.8-rc8? At the moment we're nearing the v4.11 development cycle,

Re: [PATCH] btrfs: raid56: Remove unused variant in lock_stripe_add

On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 10:23:06AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > Variant 'walk' in lock_stripe_add() is never used. > Remove it. > > Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo Added to 4.11 queue, thaks. Changelog and subject edited. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line

Re: [PATCH] btrfs-progs: lowmem-check: Fix false alert on dropped leaf

On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 01:21:07PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > For btrfs-progs test case 021-partially-dropped-snapshot-case, if the > first leaf is already dropped, btrfs check low-memory mode will report > false alert: > > checking fs roots > checksum verify failed on 29917184 found E4E3BDB6

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: refactor btrfs_extent_same() slightly

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 11:37:38PM -0800, Omar Sandoval wrote: > From: Omar Sandoval > > This was originally a prep patch for changing the behavior on len=0, but > we went another direction with that. This still makes the function > slightly easier to follow. > > Reviewed-by: Qu

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: constify struct btrfs_{,disk_}key wherever possible

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 11:24:37PM -0800, Omar Sandoval wrote: > From: Omar Sandoval > > In a lot of places, it's unclear when it's safe to reuse a struct > btrfs_key after it has been passed to a helper function. Constify these > arguments wherever possible to make it obvious. >

Re: btrfs check lowmem vs original

For sanitizing the debug tree I tried this backwards method: # btrfs-image -c5 -t4 -s /dev/mapper/brick1 > btrfsimage_30f4724a.bin # lvcreate -V 603440807936b -T vg/thintastic -n btr1 # btrfs-image -r btrfsimage_30f4724a.bin /dev/vg/btr1 # btrfs inspect-internal dump-tree /dev/vg/btr1 >

Re: [PATCH v2] Btrfs: clean up btrfs_ordered_update_i_size

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 08:16:17AM -0800, Liu Bo wrote: > Since we have a good helper entry_end, use it for ordered extent. > > Signed-off-by: Liu Bo Reviewed-by: David Sterba -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in

Re: [PATCH v2] Btrfs: fix btrfs_ordered_update_i_size to update disk_i_size properly

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 08:13:26AM -0800, Liu Bo wrote: > btrfs_ordered_update_i_size can be called by truncate and endio, but only > endio > takes ordered_extent which contains the completed IO. > > while truncating down a file, if there are some in-flight IOs, > btrfs_ordered_update_i_size in

Re: btrfs check lowmem vs original

On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 10:45 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote: >> Another file system, 15 minutes old with two mounts in its whole >> lifetime, and only written with kernel 4.10-rc3 has over 30 lines of >> varying numbers: >> >> ERROR: root 257 EXTENT DATA[150134 11317248] prealloc

[PULL] Btrfs fixes for 4.10

Hi, a few more fixes, please pull. Thanks. The following changes since commit 0bf70aebf12d8fa0d06967b72ca4b257eb6adf06: Merge branch 'tracepoint-updates-4.10' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kdave/linux into

Re: [PATCH] btrfs-progs: lowmem-check: Fix wrong extent tree iteration

On Fri, 2017-01-20 at 15:58 +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > Nice to hear that, although the -5 error seems to be caught > I'll locate the problem and then send the patch. > > Thanks for your testing! You're welcome... just ping me once I should do another run. Cheers, Chris. smime.p7s Description:

Re: btrfs recovery

Am 20.01.2017 um 09:05 schrieb Duncan: Sebastian Gottschall posted on Thu, 19 Jan 2017 11:06:19 +0100 as excerpted: I have a question. after a power outage my system was turning into a unrecoverable state using btrfs (kernel 4.9) since im running --init-extent-tree now for 3 days i'm asking

Re: btrfs recovery

Am 20.01.2017 um 02:08 schrieb Qu Wenruo: At 01/19/2017 06:06 PM, Sebastian Gottschall wrote: Hello I have a question. after a power outage my system was turning into a unrecoverable state using btrfs (kernel 4.9) since im running --init-extent-tree now for 3 days i'm asking how long this

Re: btrfs recovery

Sebastian Gottschall posted on Thu, 19 Jan 2017 11:06:19 +0100 as excerpted: > I have a question. after a power outage my system was turning into a > unrecoverable state using btrfs (kernel 4.9) > since im running --init-extent-tree now for 3 days i'm asking how long > this process normally takes

Re: [PATCH] btrfs-progs: lowmem-check: Fix wrong extent tree iteration

At 01/20/2017 01:10 AM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: Hey Qu. On Wed, 2017-01-18 at 16:48 +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: To Christoph, Would you please try this patch, and to see if it suppress the block group warning? I did another round of fsck in both modes (original/lomem), first WITHOUT