On 31/10/2023 23:39, Filipe Manana wrote:
On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 9:26 PM Josef Bacik wrote:
From: Sweet Tea Dorminy
Make sure that snapshots of encrypted data are readable and writeable.
Test deliberately high-numbered to not conflict.
Signed-off-by: Sweet Tea Dorminy
---
tests/btrf
On 11/9/23 04:25, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Thu, Nov 02, 2023 at 07:42:50PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
On 10/11/23 04:26, Josef Bacik wrote:
generic/580 tests both v1 and v2 encryption policies, however btrfs only
supports v2 policies. Split this into two tests so that we can get the
v2 coverage
ctory.
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik
Looks good.
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
On 10/11/23 04:26, Josef Bacik wrote:
generic/580 tests both v1 and v2 encryption policies, however btrfs only
supports v2 policies. Split this into two tests so that we can get the
v2 coverage for btrfs.
Instead of duplicating the test cases for v1 and v2 encryption policies,
can we check the
er patches.
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik
---
For now this looks good;
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
Thanks, Anand
On 11/10/2023 04:26, Josef Bacik wrote:
From: Sweet Tea Dorminy
Make sure that snapshots of encrypted data are readable and writeable.
Test deliberately high-numbered to not conflict.
Signed-off-by: Sweet Tea Dorminy
Looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
Thanks, Anand
iewed-by: Anand Jain
Thanks, Anand
On 11/10/2023 04:25, Josef Bacik wrote:
From: Sweet Tea Dorminy
Signed-off-by: Sweet Tea Dorminy
---
Looks good.
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
Thanks, Anand
On 11/10/2023 04:25, Josef Bacik wrote:
From: Sweet Tea Dorminy
Add the relevant call to get an encrypted filename from btrfs.
Signed-off-by: Sweet Tea Dorminy
Looks good.
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
Thanks, Anand
nonce for the data nonce; when we write a bigger file test,
we'll need to change that.
Signed-off-by: Sweet Tea Dorminy
---
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
Thanks, Anand
: Anand Jain
And, as Eric pointed out, the naming can be more intuitive. Keywords
such as 'inode' and 'extent' will make them more intuitive, rather than
'file' and 'data,' IMO.
Thanks, Anand
On 11/10/2023 04:25, Josef Bacik wrote:
From: Sweet Tea Dorminy
Make sure that we succeed at reflinking encrypted data.
Test deliberately numbered with a high number so it won't conflict with
tests between now and merge.
---
Looks good. However, SOB is missing.
Thanks, Anand
On 09/08/2023 01:21, Sweet Tea Dorminy wrote:
Add the modes of getting the encryption nonces, either inode or extent,
to the various get_encryption_nonce functions. For now, no encrypt test
makes a file with more than one extent, so we can just grab the first
extent's nonce for the data nonce; wh
On 09/08/2023 01:21, Sweet Tea Dorminy wrote:
Extent encryption is different from the existing inode-based encryption
insofar as it only generates encryption keys for data encryption at the
moment at which the data is written. This means that when a session key is
removed, even if there's an open
On 09/04/2021 23:56, Goldwyn Rodrigues wrote:
check_running_fs_exclop() can return 1 when exclop is changed to "none"
The ret is set by the return value of the select() operation. Checking
the exclusive op changes just the exclop variable while ret is still
set to 1.
Set ret exclusively if exclo
On 09/04/2021 02:33, Boris Burkov wrote:
The tree checker currently rejects unrecognized flags when it reads
btrfs_inode_item. Practically, this means that adding a new flag makes
the change backwards incompatible if the flag is ever set on a file.
Take up one of the 4 reserved u64 fields in
yep.
Signed-off-by: Goldwyn Rodrigues
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
---
fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 2 +-
fs/btrfs/reada.c | 6 ++
2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
index 2acbd8919611..8bf434a4f014 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
+++ b/fs/bt
tach().
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
Signed-off-by: Goldwyn Rodrigues
---
fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 1 -
fs/btrfs/reada.c | 9 +
2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
index f2fd73e58ee6..2acbd8919611 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
+++
On 07/04/2021 00:48, David Sterba wrote:
On Mon, Apr 05, 2021 at 05:18:32PM +0800, Su Yue wrote:
On Mon 05 Apr 2021 at 16:38, Anand Jain
wrote:
Ping again.
It's already queued in misc-next.
commit 441737bb30f83914bb8517f52088c0130138d74b (misc-next)
Author: Anand Jain
Date: Fr
On 05/04/2021 14:14, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2021/4/3 下午7:08, David Sterba wrote:
On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 03:14:32PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
This patchset can be fetched from the following github repo, along with
the full subpage RW support:
https://github.com/adam900710/linux/tree/subpage
This
On 05/04/2021 17:18, Su Yue wrote:
On Mon 05 Apr 2021 at 16:38, Anand Jain wrote:
Ping again.
It's already queued in misc-next.
Oh thanks.
Thanks David.
-Anand
commit 441737bb30f83914bb8517f52088c0130138d74b (misc-next)
Author: Anand Jain
Date: Fri Jul 17 18:05:25 2020
Ping again.
Thanks, Anand
On 06/03/2021 16:37, Anand Jain wrote:
David,
Ping?
Thanks, Anand
On 04/03/2021 02:10, Anand Jain wrote:
Following test case reproduces lockdep warning.
Test case:
DEV1=/dev/vdb
DEV2=/dev/vdc
umount /btrfs
run mkfs.btrfs -f $DEV1
run btrfstune -S 1 $DEV1
run
On 29/03/2021 10:01, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2021/3/29 上午4:02, Ritesh Harjani wrote:
On 21/03/25 09:16PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2021/3/25 下午8:20, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 3:17 AM Qu Wenruo wrote:
This patchset can be fetched from the following github repo, along
with
the fu
On 01/04/2021 13:36, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2021/3/30 上午2:53, David Sterba wrote:
On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 03:14:32PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
v3:
- Rename the sysfs to supported_sectorsizes
- Rebased to latest misc-next branch
This removes 2 cleanup patches.
- Add new overview comment for su
On 25/03/2021 15:14, Qu Wenruo wrote:
In btrfs_invalidatepage(), we need to iterate through all ordered
extents and finish them.
This involved a loop to exhaust all ordered extents, but that loop is
implemented using again: label and goto.
Refactor the code by:
- Use a while() loop
Just an ob
On 30/03/2021 02:20, David Sterba wrote:
On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 10:41:43PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
On 25/03/2021 15:14, Qu Wenruo wrote:
+static ssize_t supported_sectorsizes_show(struct kobject *kobj,
+ struct kobj_attribute *a
On 15/03/2021 13:53, Naohiro Aota wrote:
The following patch will change the superblock logging zones' location from
fixed zone number to fixed LBAs.
Here is a background of how the superblock is working on zoned btrfs.
This document will be promoted to btrfs-dev-docs in the future.
# Superblo
On 25/03/2021 15:14, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Add extra sysfs interface features/supported_ro_sectorsize and
features/supported_rw_sectorsize to indicate subpage support.
Currently for supported_rw_sectorsize all architectures only have their
PAGE_SIZE listed.
While for supported_ro_sectorsize, for sys
On 19/03/2021 18:48, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
When a file gets deleted on a zoned file system, the space freed is not
returned back into the block group's free space, but is migrated to
zone_unusable.
As this zone_unusable space is behind the current write pointer it is not
possible to use it
On 19/03/2021 18:48, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
As a preparation for another user, rename the unused_bgs_mutex into
reclaim_bgs_lock.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Thumshirn
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
patch just fixes it.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain
---
v2: Drop the idea to fix the period at the end of the single line help
statements. Because the fix wasn't sufficient, there are more, and
it can be done separately.
cmds/inspect.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 dele
: Anand Jain
---
cmds/inspect.c | 8
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/cmds/inspect.c b/cmds/inspect.c
index 15f19c8a3027..fcb3b1ae1321 100644
--- a/cmds/inspect.c
+++ b/cmds/inspect.c
@@ -80,7 +80,7 @@ out:
static const char * const
oup.c |2 +-
libbtrfsutil/stubs.c |2 +-
libbtrfsutil/stubs.h |2 +-
libbtrfsutil/subvolume.c |2 +-
17 files changed, 495 insertions(+), 832 deletions(-)
delete mode 100644 libbtrfsutil/COPYING.LESSER
Acked-by: Anand Jain
nment to subdir-ccflags-y when referencing cc-option.
This causes make to also evaluate += immediately, cc-option
calls are done right away and we don't end up with KBUILD_CFLAGS
referencing itself.
Thanks for the patch.
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
Signed-off-by: Victor Erminpour
---
On 16/03/2021 08:05, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2021/3/16 上午2:44, David Sterba wrote:
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 08:39:31PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2021/3/15 下午7:59, Anand Jain wrote:
On 10/03/2021 17:08, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Add extra sysfs interface features/supported_ro_sectorsize and
ed-by: Anand Jain
-Anand
fs/btrfs/inode.c | 8 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
index 2973cec05505..f99554f0bd48 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
@@ -8404,15 +8404,11 @@ static void btrfs_invalidat
On 10/03/2021 17:08, Qu Wenruo wrote:
In btrfs_invalidatepage() we introduce a temporary variable, new_len, to
update ordered->truncated_len.
But we can use min() to replace it completely and no need for the
variable.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
---
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
-Anand
On 10/03/2021 17:08, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Add extra sysfs interface features/supported_ro_sectorsize and
features/supported_rw_sectorsize to indicate subpage support.
Currently for supported_rw_sectorsize all architectures only have their
PAGE_SIZE listed.
While for supported_ro_sectorsize, for sys
On 11/3/21 10:31 pm, fdman...@kernel.org wrote:
From: Filipe Manana
Several functions of the tree modification log use integers as booleans,
so change them to use booleans instead, making their use more clear.
Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
read it to fix a bug.
Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
this happens only in RO mount.
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
path = btrfs_alloc_path();
if (!path) {
ret = -ENOMEM;
root. Fix this
by skipping init'ing the device stats if we do not have a device root.
Reported-by: Neal Gompa
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
s_info pointer properly, so this needs to be done unconditionally
always so that we can properly deref device->fs_info in rescue cases.
Reported-by: Neal Gompa
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
On 12/3/21 1:52 pm, Anand Jain wrote:
On 12/3/21 12:23 am, Josef Bacik wrote:
Neal reported a panic trying to use -o rescue=all
BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0030
PGD 0 P4D 0
Oops: [#1] SMP NOPTI
CPU: 0 PID: 696 Comm: mount Tainted: G W
On 12/3/21 12:23 am, Josef Bacik wrote:
Neal reported a panic trying to use -o rescue=all
BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0030
PGD 0 P4D 0
Oops: [#1] SMP NOPTI
CPU: 0 PID: 696 Comm: mount Tainted: GW 5.12.0-rc2+ #296
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC
Hi,
How about a review of this test case or suggest any better ideas?
If we are ok with this, I will be adding 2 other types of workloads
that we need to test read policies.
Thanks, Anand
On 22/2/21 10:48 pm, Anand Jain wrote:
This test case runs fio for raid1/10/1c3/1c4 profiles and all
ported-by: Abaci Robot
Signed-off-by: Yang Li
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
---
fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 7 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
index 41b718c..b75d2d9 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
David,
Ping?
Thanks, Anand
On 04/03/2021 02:10, Anand Jain wrote:
Following test case reproduces lockdep warning.
Test case:
DEV1=/dev/vdb
DEV2=/dev/vdc
umount /btrfs
run mkfs.btrfs -f $DEV1
run btrfstune -S 1 $DEV1
run mount $DEV1 /btrfs
run btrfs device add $DEV2 /btrfs -f
run umount
On 05/03/2021 15:15, Alexandru Stan wrote:
Hello,
My raid1 btrfs fs went read only recently. It was comprised of 2 drives:
/dev/sda ST4000VN008 (firmware SC60) - 6 month old drive
/dev/sdb ST4000VN000 (firmware SC44) - 5 year old drive (but it was
mostly idly spinning, very little accesses were
ice_list_mutex in clone_fs_devices().
And adds a lockdep_assert_held(&uuid_mutex) in clone_fs_devices().
Reported-by: Su Yue
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain
---
v2: Remove Martin's Reported-by and Tested-by.
Add Su's Reported-by.
Add lockdep_assert_held check.
Update the change
On 26/02/2021 23:10, David Sterba wrote:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 01:01:02PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
On 25/02/2021 12:39, Su Yue wrote:
While playing with seed device(misc/next and v5.11), lockdep complains
the following:
To reproduce:
dev1=/dev/sdb1
dev2=/dev/sdb2
umount /mnt
mkfs.btrfs
-by: Eric Sandeen
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
Thanks.
---
common/btrfs| 8
tests/btrfs/124 | 2 ++
tests/btrfs/125 | 2 ++
tests/btrfs/163 | 2 ++
tests/btrfs/164 | 2 ++
tests/btrfs/219 | 2 ++
tests/btrfs/225 | 3 +++
7 files changed, 21 insertions
On 25/02/2021 12:39, Su Yue wrote:
While playing with seed device(misc/next and v5.11), lockdep complains
the following:
To reproduce:
dev1=/dev/sdb1
dev2=/dev/sdb2
umount /mnt
mkfs.btrfs -f $dev1
btrfstune -S 1 $dev1
mount $dev1 /mnt
btrfs device add $dev2 /mnt/ -f
umount /mnt
m
On 25/02/2021 11:18, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2021/2/25 上午11:15, Eric Sandeen wrote:
On 2/24/21 9:13 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Now this makes way more sense,
Sorry for the earlier mistake.
as your previous comment on
_btrfs_forget_or_module_reload is completely correct.
_btrfs_forget_or_module
On 12/02/2021 22:36, David Sterba wrote:
On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 09:25:18PM -0800, Anand Jain wrote:
Move the static function scrub_checksum_tree_block() before its use in
the scrub.c, and drop its declaration.
No functional changes.
We've rejected patches that move static function w
On 25/02/2021 05:39, Eric Sandeen wrote:
On 2/24/21 10:12 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
Last week I was curious to just see how btrfs is faring with RAID5 in
xfstests, so I set it up for a quick run with devices configured as:
Whoops this was supposed to cc: fstests, not fsdevel, sorry.
-Eric
TES
On 23/02/2021 21:53, David Sterba wrote:
On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 10:19:06PM +0100, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
From: Goffredo Baroncelli
This ioctl is a base for returning / setting information from / to the
fields of the btrfs_dev_item object.
Please don't add a new ioctl for properties, th
On 24/02/2021 01:35, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
On 23/02/2021 18:20, Steven Davies wrote:
On 2021-02-23 14:30, David Sterba wrote:
On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 09:43:04AM +, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
On 23/02/2021 10:13, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
On 22/02/2021 21:07, Steven Davies wrote:
[+
study of the read policy performance.
I find tests/btrfs as the placeholder for this test case. As it
contains many things which are btrfs specific and didn't fit well
under perf.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain
---
tests/btrfs/231 | 145
tests/
On 19/02/2021 03:11, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
On 2/18/21 6:20 PM, Anand Jain wrote:
btrfs_chunk_alloc() uses dev_alloc_list to allocate new chunks. The
function's stack leading to btrfs_cmp_device_info() sorts the
dev_alloc_list in the descending order of unallocated space. This
sorting
added on top of this
when we have a consensus.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain
---
This + sequential chunk layout hint (experimental) (patch not yet sent)
helped me get consistent performance numbers for read_policy pid.
As chunk layout hint is not set at mkfs, a balance after setting the
desired chunk l
the result is in the $seqresfull-file.
I find tests/btrfs as the placeholder for this test case. As it
contains many things which are btrfs specific and didn't fit well
under perf.
Feedback/suggestions welcome.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain
---
tests/btrfs/231
Move the static function scrub_checksum_tree_block() before its use in
the scrub.c, and drop its declaration.
No functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain
---
fs/btrfs/scrub.c | 133 +++
1 file changed, 66 insertions(+), 67 deletions(-)
diff
Move scrub_checksum_data() before its use, and drop its declaration.
No functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain
---
fs/btrfs/scrub.c | 61
1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/scrub.c b/fs/btrfs/scrub.c
btrfs_extent_readonly() is used by can_nocow_extent() in inode.c. So move
btrfs_extent_readonly() from extent-tree.c to inode.c and declare it as
static.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain
---
fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 1 -
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 13 -
fs/btrfs/inode.c | 13
Drop function declarations at the beginning of the file scrub.c. These
functions are defined before they are used in the same file.
No functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain
---
fs/btrfs/scrub.c | 8
1 file changed, 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/scrub.c b/fs/btrfs
btrfs_extent_readonly() checks if the bg is readonly, the bool return type
will suffice its need.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain
---
fs/btrfs/inode.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
index 2ed7d736e39a..ebb2b8e3a71c 100644
This patchset makes btrfs_extent_readonly() static and changes the return
type to bool.
And drops few unwanted function declarations in the scrub.c.
Thanks. Anand
Anand Jain (5):
btrfs: make btrfs_extent_readonly() static
btrfs: btrfs_extent_readonly() change return type to bool
btrfs
snapshot lock during swap file activation before
locking the extent range, as that is the order in which we lock these
during buffered writes.
Fixes: ed46ff3d42378 ("Btrfs: support swap files")
Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
Thanks, Anan
- this is the same approach we currently use for balance.
Fixes: ed46ff3d42378 ("Btrfs: support swap files")
Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana
Looks good.
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
Thanks, Anand
---
fs/btrfs/block-group.c | 33 -
fs/btrfs/block-gr
.
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
Thanks, Anand
---
fs/btrfs/inode.c | 4 +---
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
index 04cd95899ac8..76a0151ef05a 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
@@ -1657,9 +1657,6 @@ static noinline
On 10/02/2021 04:30, Michal Rostecki wrote:
From: Michal Rostecki
Add a new raid1 read policy `roundrobin`. For each read request, it
selects the mirror which has lower load than queue depth and it starts
iterating from the last used mirror (by the current CPU). Load is
defined as the number of
On 10/02/2021 04:30, Michal Rostecki wrote:
From: Michal Rostecki
This patch series adds a new raid1 read policy - roundrobin. For each
request, it selects the mirror which has lower load than queue depth.
Load is defined as the number of inflight requests + a penalty value
(if the scheduled r
On 10/02/2021 05:12, Michal Rostecki wrote:
On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 08:30:01PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
Hi Michal,
Did you get any chance to run the evaluation with this patchset?
Thanks, Anand
Hi Anand,
Yes, I tested your policies now. Sorry for late response.
For the
On 2/4/2021 6:11 PM, Filipe Manana wrote:
On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 8:48 AM Anand Jain wrote:
On 2/3/2021 7:17 PM, fdman...@kernel.org wrote:
From: Filipe Manana
When we active a swap file, at btrfs_swap_activate(), we acquire the
exclusive operation lock to prevent the physical location of
Hi Michal,
Did you get any chance to run the evaluation with this patchset?
Thanks, Anand
On 1/30/2021 9:08 AM, Anand Jain wrote:
500m is really small data size for such measurement
I reran the read policy tests with some changes in the fio command
options. Mainly to measure IOPS
Nice. Works well.
Thanks, Anand
On 2/4/2021 3:03 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
During the long time subpage development, I forgot to properly check
compression code after just one compression read success during early
development.
It turns out that, with current RO support, the compression read nee
and not a read/write lock) on
very large filesystems, with several thousands of allocated block groups.
Fixes: ed46ff3d42378 ("Btrfs: support swap files")
Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana
I am not sure about the optimization of direct IO part, but as such
changes looks good.
Reviewed
that protects it (specially since it is a spin
lock and not a read-write lock). That may make a noticeable difference
on very large filesystems, with thousands of allocated block groups.
Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
Thanks.
---
fs/btrfs/inode.c | 4 +---
1 file
On 2/3/2021 2:10 PM, Damien Le Moal wrote:
On 2021/02/03 14:22, Anand Jain wrote:
On 1/26/2021 10:24 AM, Naohiro Aota wrote:
Conventional zones do not have a write pointer, so we cannot use it to
determine the allocation offset if a block group contains a conventional
zone.
But instead, we
offset to 0, anyway.
Information about how are the WP of conventional zones used is missing here.
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
Thanks.
Signed-off-by: Naohiro Aota
---
fs/btrfs/block-group.c | 4 +-
fs/btrfs/zoned.c | 99 +++---
fs/btrfs/zoned.h
+0.001075] ---[ end trace d4f31b4f11a947b7 ]---
[ +14.775765] note: kworker/u64:1[5754] exited with preempt_count 1
Thanks, Anand
On 2/2/2021 7:28 PM, Anand Jain wrote:
On 2/2/2021 6:23 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2021/2/2 下午5:21, Anand Jain wrote:
Qu,
fstests ran
On 2/2/2021 6:23 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2021/2/2 下午5:21, Anand Jain wrote:
Qu,
fstests ran fine on an aarch64 kvm with this patch set.
Do you mean subpage patchset?
With 4K sector size?
No way it can run fine...
No . fstests ran with sectorsize == pagesize == 64k. These aren&#
Qu,
fstests ran fine on an aarch64 kvm with this patch set.
Further, I was running few hand tests as below, and it fails
with - Unable to handle kernel paging.
Test case looks something like..
On x86_64 create btrfs on a file 11g
copy /usr into /test-mnt stops at enospc
set compressio
of
device extent.
This is mainly aimed at testing parts of the zoned mode, i.e. the zoned
chunk allocator, on regular block devices.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Thumshirn
Signed-off-by: Naohiro Aota
Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
Thanks, Anand
On 1/26/2021 10:24 AM, Naohiro Aota wrote:
This final patch adds the ZONED incompat flag to
BTRFS_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_SUPP and enables btrfs to mount ZONED flagged file
system.
Signed-off-by: Naohiro Aota
Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
Thanks, Anand
---
fs/btrfs/ctree.h
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
Thanks, Anand
---
fs/btrfs/block-group.c | 8 ++--
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 17 -
fs/btrfs/zoned.h | 16
3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/block-group.c b/fs/btrfs/block-group.c
.
Also, it checks that a region allocation is not overlapping any of the
super block zones, and ensures the region is empty.
Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik
Signed-off-by: Naohiro Aota
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
A nit below.
---
fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 169
On 1/26/2021 10:24 AM, Naohiro Aota wrote:
From: Johannes Thumshirn
Run zoned btrfs mode on non-zoned devices. This is done by "slicing
up" the block-device into static sized chunks and fake a conventional zone
on each of them. The emulated zone size is determined from the size of
device extent
space cache (but, only for fitrim) or scanning the extent
tree at fitrim time. But, for now, disallow fitrim in ZONED mode.
Signed-off-by: Naohiro Aota
Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
Thanks, Anand
---
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 8
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff
rrect zone_size as well.
Once the correct zone_size is read from the device, we can rely on the
zoned flag in fs_info as well to determine if the filesystem is running in
zoned mode.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Thumshirn
Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik
Looks good.
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
T
Thumshirn
Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik
Looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
Thanks.
---
fs/btrfs/block-group.c | 39 ++-
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/block-group.c b/fs/btrfs/block-group.c
index 763a3671b7af
he SB locations are at a conventional zone on emulated zoned
mode.
Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik
Signed-off-by: Naohiro Aota
Makes sense to me.
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
Thanks.
---
fs/btrfs/zoned.c | 8 +++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/zoned.c b/fs/
y: Naohiro Aota
Patches are already in for-next. My apologies for the delay in review
here and in the following patches how many ever I could.
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
Thanks.
---
fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 13 +
fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 4
fs/btrfs/zone
500m is really small data size for such measurement
I reran the read policy tests with some changes in the fio command
options. Mainly to measure IOPS throughput and latency on the filesystem
with latency-policy and pid-policy.
Each of these tests was run for 3 iterations and the best and wo
On 22/1/21 1:52 am, David Sterba wrote:
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 06:10:36PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
On 20/1/21 8:14 pm, David Sterba wrote:
On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 11:52:05PM -0800, Anand Jain wrote:
The read policy type latency routes the read IO based on the historical
average wait
uct btrfs_fs_info
*fs_info,
fs_info->fs_devices->read_policy = BTRFS_READ_POLICY_PID;
fallthrough;
case BTRFS_READ_POLICY_PID:
+ /*
+ * Just to factor in the cost of calculating the avg wait using
+ * iostat, call btrfs_find_best_stripe() here for the PID policy
+ * and drop its results o
On 20/1/21 9:54 pm, Michal Rostecki wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 08:30:56PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
I ran fio tests again, now with dstat in an another window. I don't
notice any such stalls, the read numbers went continuous until fio
finished. Could you please check with the
if (x)
- kvfree(x);
+ kvfree(x);
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain
Thanks, Anand
return 0;
}
On 20/1/21 3:52 pm, Anand Jain wrote:
This is a preparatory patch and introduces a new device flag
'read_preferred', RW-able using sysfs interface.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain > ---
v4: -
There is rb from Josef for this patch in v3.
Could you please add it?
Thanks, Anand
1 - 100 of 3682 matches
Mail list logo
