Wow, thank to everyone for all that information, I'm going to have to
take some time to digest everything. :)
I just wanted to quickly say one thing: As Duncan surmised, I'm not
treating this as my primary backup, but more of an experimental add-on
feature. The primary backup goes to an ext4 part
James A. Robinson posted on Fri, 14 Sep 2018 14:05:29 -0700 as excerpted:
> The mail archive seems to indicate this list is appropriate for not only
> the technical coding issues, but also for user questions, so I wanted to
> pose a question here. If I'm wrong about that, I apologize in advance.
On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 3:05 PM, James A. Robinson
wrote:
> https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Incremental_Backup
>
> talks about the basic snapshot capabilities of btrfs and led
> me to look up what, if any, limits might apply. I find some
> threads from a few years ago that talk about lim
Thanks very much for the useful information. I'll give the simple
scheme a try, after I adjust mount preferences.
Jim
Hi,
On 09/14/2018 11:05 PM, James A. Robinson wrote:
> The mail archive seems to indicate this list is appropriate
> for not only the technical coding issues, but also for user
> questions, so I wanted to pose a question here. If I'm
> wrong about that, I apologize in advance.
It's fine. Your ob
The mail archive seems to indicate this list is appropriate
for not only the technical coding issues, but also for user
questions, so I wanted to pose a question here. If I'm
wrong about that, I apologize in advance.
The page
https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Incremental_Backup
talks abou
When we delete an inode,
btrfs_evict_inode() {
truncate_inode_pages_final()
truncate_inode_pages_range()
lock_page()
truncate_cleanup_page()
btrfs_invalidatepage()
wait_on_page_writeback
btrfs_loo
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 10:13:06PM +0200, Rafael Jesús Alcántara Pérez wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It seems that btrfs-progs_4.17-1 from Sid, includes that feature (at
> least, it says so in the manual page). I don't know if I can install it
> on Stretch but I'll try.
>
> Greets and thank you very much
Hi,
It seems that btrfs-progs_4.17-1 from Sid, includes that feature (at
least, it says so in the manual page). I don't know if I can install it
on Stretch but I'll try.
Greets and thank you very much to both of you ;)
Rafael J. Alcántara Pérez.
El 14/09/18 a las 20:18, Nicholas D Steeves escrib
On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 03:14:33PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 06:06:22AM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
> > As VFS has called ->invalidatepage() to get all ordered extents done
> > and truncated all page cache pages, wait_ordered_range() is just a
> > noop.
>
> Agreed, though looki
On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 05:11:02PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 11:31:49AM -0700, Liu Bo wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 05:34:03PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 03:51:48AM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
> > > > Several structs in btrfs are using rb_first
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 10:46:12PM +0500, Roman Mamedov wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Sep 2018 19:27:04 +0200
> Rafael Jesús Alcántara Pérez wrote:
>
> > BTRFS info (device sdc1): use lzo compression, level 0
> > BTRFS warning (device sdc1): 'recovery' is deprecated, use
> > 'usebackuproot' in
On Fri, 14 Sep 2018 19:27:04 +0200
Rafael Jesús Alcántara Pérez wrote:
> BTRFS info (device sdc1): use lzo compression, level 0
> BTRFS warning (device sdc1): 'recovery' is deprecated, use
> 'usebackuproot' instead
> BTRFS info (device sdc1): trying to use backup root at mount time
> BTRF
Hi:
After a power outage, my server refuses to mount a BTRFS file system.
This is the result of trying to mount with options recovery,ro:
BTRFS info (device sdc1): use lzo compression, level 0
BTRFS warning (device sdc1): 'recovery' is deprecated, use
'usebackuproot' instead
BTRFS info (device s
Hi again:
Sorry, I missed some details :)
$ uname -a
Linux gemini 4.17.0-0.bpo.3-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 4.17.17-1~bpo9+1
(2018-08-27) x86_64 GNU/Linux
$ btrfs --version
btrfs-progs v4.13.3
$ sudo btrfs fi show
Label: '/srv/dedalo' uuid: d1071744-ac3b-4926-bb43-27091ea73c05
Total devices 4
On Fri, Sep 07, 2018 at 04:55:11PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> The exit sequence in btrfs_dev_replace_start does not allow to simply
> add a label to the right place so the error handling after starting
> transaction failure jumps there. Currently there's a lock that pairs
> with the unlock in the
Avoid the inline ifdefs and use two sections for self-tests enabled and
disabled.
Though there could be no ifdef and unconditional test_bit of
BTRFS_FS_STATE_DUMMY_FS_INFO, the static inline can help to optimize out
any code that would depend on conditions using btrfs_is_testing.
As this is only
The helper find_lock_delalloc_range is now conditionally built static,
dpending on whether the self-tests are enabled or not. There's a macro
that is supposed to hide the export, used only once. To discourage
further use, drop it an add a public wrapper for the helper needed by
tests.
Signed-off-b
On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 05:18:13PM -0400, je...@suse.com wrote:
> From: Jeff Mahoney
>
> This patch set fixes a few issues with trim.
>
> 1) Fix device list iteration. We're iterating the ->alloc_list while
>holding the device_list_mutex. The ->alloc_list is protected by
>the chunk mut
On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 05:18:16PM -0400, je...@suse.com wrote:
> From: Jeff Mahoney
>
> Commit 499f377f49f08 (btrfs: iterate over unused chunk space in FITRIM)
> fixed free space trimming, but introduced latency when it was running.
> This is due to it pinning the transaction using both a increm
On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 05:18:15PM -0400, je...@suse.com wrote:
> From: Jeff Mahoney
>
> We check whether any device the file system is using supports discard
> in the ioctl call, but then we attempt to trim free extents on every
> device regardless of whether discard is supported. Due to the wa
On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 05:18:14PM -0400, je...@suse.com wrote:
> From: Jeff Mahoney
>
> btrfs_trim_fs iterates over the fs_devices->alloc_list while holding
> the device_list_mutex. The problem is that ->alloc_list is protected
> by the chunk mutex. We don't want to hold the chunk mutex over
>
On Fri, Sep 07, 2018 at 02:16:24PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> [BUG]
> fstrim on some btrfs only trims the unallocated space, not trimming any
> space in existing block groups.
>
> [CAUSE]
> Before fstrim_range passed to btrfs_trim_fs(), it get truncated to
> range [0, super->total_bytes).
> So late
On Fri, Sep 07, 2018 at 02:16:23PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> + if (bg_failed)
> + btrfs_warn(fs_info, "failed to trim %llu block group(s)",
> +bg_failed);
> + if (dev_failed)
> + btrfs_warn(fs_info, "failed to trim %llu device(s)",
> +
On Fri, Sep 07, 2018 at 02:16:23PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> Function btrfs_trim_fs() doesn't handle errors in a consistent way, if
> error happens when trimming existing block groups, it will skip the
> remaining blocks and continue to trim unallocated space for each device.
>
> And the return va
On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 07:47:29PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 03:52:17PM -0400, je...@suse.com wrote:
> > From: Jeff Mahoney
> >
> > When we fail to start a transaction in btrfs_dev_replace_start,
> > we leave dev_replace->replace_start set to STARTED but clear
> > ->src
On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 04:10:27PM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Here is the second version of the delayed refs for progs support. The first
> version can be found here [1]. I've taken into account all the feedback from
> Misono and have verified the code is working and rebased it
On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 11:31:49AM -0700, Liu Bo wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 05:34:03PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 03:51:48AM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
> > > Several structs in btrfs are using rb_first() in a while loop, it'd be
> > > more efficient to do this with rb_fi
On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 03:39:03PM +0800, Su Yanjun wrote:
> Modify the file name length limit to meet the Linux naming convention.
> In addition, the file name length is always bigger than 0, no need to
> compare with 0 again.
>
> Issue: #145
> Signed-off-by: Su Yanjun
Looks good, please send
On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 07:43:27AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>
>
> On 2018/9/11 下午10:48, David Sterba wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 04, 2018 at 08:41:28PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> >> No need to abort checking, especially for RO check free space cache is
> >> meaningless, the errors in fs/extent tree is m
On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 07:59:34AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>
>
> On 2018/9/12 上午12:38, David Sterba wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 01:27:39PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> >> Gentle ping.
> >>
> >> These fixes are pretty small, I'd like to see them merged before I need
> >> to rebase them again a
On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 12:14:47PM -0700, Omar Sandoval wrote:
> > The unlikely can go away, sure.
> >
> > I would still like to remove the test_bit call when tests are compiled
> > out. There are about 10 calls to btrfs_is_testing in various core
> > functions, followed by further statements. Thi
On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 09:51:33AM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>
>
> On 12.09.2018 01:06, Liu Bo wrote:
> > balance_level() may return early in some cases, but these checks don't
> > have to be done with blocking write lock.
> >
> > This puts together these checks into a helper and the benefit
On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 11:35:00AM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
> In btrfs_orphan_cleanup the final 'if (ret) goto out' cannot ever be
> executed. This is due to the last assignment to 'ret' depending on
> the return value of btrfs_iget. If an error other than -ENOENT is
> returned then the loop i
On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 06:06:22AM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
> As VFS has called ->invalidatepage() to get all ordered extents done
> and truncated all page cache pages, wait_ordered_range() is just a
> noop.
Agreed, though looking up the exact points when there are no pages to be
waited for took me so
On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 01:44:42AM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
> As long as @eb is marked with EXTENT_BUFFER_DIRTY, all of its pages
> are dirty, so no need to set pages dirty again.
>
> Ftrace showed that the loop took 10us on my dev box, so removing this
> can save us at least 10us if eb is already dir
On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 01:46:08AM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
> Just in case that someone breaks the rule that pages are dirty as long
> as eb is dirty.
>
> Signed-off-by: Liu Bo
Reviewed-by: David Sterba
I've reordered the patches so the assert comes first, before the actual
conditional dirtying.
On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 01:55:59AM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
> btrfs_search_slot()
>if (level != 0)
> setup_nodes_for_search()
> balance_level()
>
> It is just impossible to have level=0 in balance_level.
>
> Reviewed-by: Nikolay Borisov
> Signed-off-by: Liu Bo
Reviewed-by: Davi
Hi,
thanks for the report, I've forwarded it to the issue tracker
https://github.com/kdave/btrfs-progs/issues/148
The show command uses the information provided by blkid, that presumably
caches that. The default behaviour of 'fi show' is to skip mount checks,
so the delays are likely caused by bl
Dear Maintainer,
the command btrfs fi show takes too much time:
time btrfs fi show
Label: none uuid: 513dc574-e8bc-4336-b181-00d1e9782c1c
Total devices 2 FS bytes used 2.34GiB
devid1 size 927.79GiB used 4.03GiB path /dev/sdv2
devid2 size 927.79GiB used 4.03GiB path /dev/sda
In github issues, one user reports unexpected ENOSPC error if enabling
datasum.
After some investigation, it looks like that during ext2_saved/image
creation, we could create large file extent whose size can be 128M (max
data extent size).
In that case, its csum will be at least 128K. Under certai
In github issues, one user reports unexpected ENOSPC error if enabling
datasum.
After some investigation, it looks like that during ext2_saved/image
creation, we could create large file extent whose size can be 128M (max
data extent size).
In that case, its csum will be at least 128K. Under certai
On 14.09.2018 10:25, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> When convert failed, the error messsage would look like:
>
> create btrfs filesystem:
> blocksize: 4096
> nodesize: 16384
> features: extref, skinny-metadata (default)
> creating ext2 image file
> ERROR: failed to create ext2_sav
On 14.09.2018 10:25, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> When pread64() returns value smaller than expected, it normally means
> EIO, so just return -EIO to replace the intermediate number.
> So when IO fails, we should be able to get more meaningful error number
> of than EPERM.
>
> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
R
When convert failed, the error messsage would look like:
create btrfs filesystem:
blocksize: 4096
nodesize: 16384
features: extref, skinny-metadata (default)
creating ext2 image file
ERROR: failed to create ext2_saved/image: -1
WARNING: an error occurred during conversi
When pread64() returns value smaller than expected, it normally means
EIO, so just return -EIO to replace the intermediate number.
So when IO fails, we should be able to get more meaningful error number
of than EPERM.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
---
convert/source-fs.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 ins
This patchset can be fetched from github:
https://github.com/adam900710/btrfs-progs/tree/convert_error_messages
As usual, it's based on latest stable tag (v4.17.1).
There is one error report of btrfs-convert, the error message looks
pretty meaningless:
create btrfs filesystem:
blocksize:
On 09/14/2018 02:27 PM, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
On 14.09.2018 03:58, Su Yue wrote:
On 09/14/2018 07:37 AM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2018/9/13 上午4:49, damenly...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Su Yue
In check_fs_roots_lowmem(), we do search and follow the resulted path
to call check_fs_root(), the
48 matches
Mail list logo
