On 06/29/2018 02:26 AM, David Sterba wrote:
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 07:22:59PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
The circular locking dependency warning occurs at FSSTRESS_PROG.
And in particular at doproc() in xfstests/ltp/fsstress.c, randomly
at any of the command at
opdesc_t
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 07:22:59PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
> The circular locking dependency warning occurs at FSSTRESS_PROG.
> And in particular at doproc() in xfstests/ltp/fsstress.c, randomly
> at any of the command at
> opdesc_tops[] = { ..}
> which involves calling mmap
On 06/12/2018 12:16 AM, David Sterba wrote:
On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 10:50:54AM +0100, Filipe Manana wrote:
btrfs: replace uuid_mutex by device_list_mutex in
btrfs_open_devices
*
* the mutex can be very coarse and can cover long-running operations
*
* protects: updates
On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 10:50:54AM +0100, Filipe Manana wrote:
> >>>btrfs: replace uuid_mutex by device_list_mutex in
> >>> btrfs_open_devices
> >> *
> >> * the mutex can be very coarse and can cover long-running operations
> >> *
> >> * protects: updates to fs_devices counters
On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 9:14 AM, Anand Jain wrote:
>
>
> On 06/10/2018 12:21 AM, Filipe Manana wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 4:43 PM, David Sterba wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> there are some new features and a usual load of cleanups, more details
>>> below.
>>>
>>> Specifically, there's a
On 06/10/2018 12:21 AM, Filipe Manana wrote:
On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 4:43 PM, David Sterba wrote:
Hi,
there are some new features and a usual load of cleanups, more details below.
Specifically, there's a set of new non-privileged ioctls to allow
subvolume listing. It works but still needs
On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 4:43 PM, David Sterba wrote:
> Hi,
>
> there are some new features and a usual load of cleanups, more details below.
>
> Specifically, there's a set of new non-privileged ioctls to allow
> subvolume listing. It works but still needs a security review as it's a
> new
Hi,
please pull the following branch with 2 regression fixes and one fix for
stable. Thanks.
The following changes since commit c0872323746e11fc79344e3738b283a8cda86654:
btrfs: print-tree: debugging output enhancement
Hi,
we have queued a few more fixes (error handling, log replay, softlockup)
and the rest is SPDX update that touches almost all files so the
diffstat is long. The top patch is a fixup for excessive warning and
was not in linux-next but I've tested it locally.
Please pull, thanks.
Hi,
please pull the following btrfs changes. There are a several user
visible changes, the rest is mostly invisible and continues to clean up
the whole code base.
There are no merge conflicts with current master. Please pull, thanks.
User visible changes:
- new mount option nossd_spread
Hi Linus,
Please pull my for-linus branch:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus
Miao Xie has been very busy, fixing races and enospc problems and many
other small but important pieces.
Alexandre Oliva discovered some problems with how our error handling
Hi Linus,
Please pull my for-linus branch:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus
We've had a busy two weeks of bug fixing. The biggest patches in here
are some long standing early-enospc problems (Josef) and a very old race
where compression and mmap
Hi Linus,
Please grab my for-linus:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus
These are scattered fixes and one performance improvement. The biggest
functional change is in how we throttle metadata changes. The new code
bumps our average file creation rate
[ sorry, resend. My lbdb autocompleted with an extra r in kernel.org ]
Hi everyone,
My for-linus branch has a big set of fixes and features:
Does this include raid-[56]?
Vennlige hilsener / Best regards
roy
--
Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
(+47) 98013356
r...@karlsbakk.net
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 07:09:57PM +0100, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote:
[ sorry, resend. My lbdb autocompleted with an extra r in kernel.org ]
Hi everyone,
My for-linus branch has a big set of fixes and features:
Does this include raid-[56]?
As Chris's last sentence in that mail
Hi everyone,
My for-linus branch has a big set of fixes and features:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus
This was against 3.7, and it has two easy conflicts against Linus'
current head. My -next branch has the resolutions, but Linus wills
surely fix
[ sorry, resend. My lbdb autocompleted with an extra r in kernel.org ]
Hi everyone,
My for-linus branch has a big set of fixes and features:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus
This was against 3.7, and it has two easy conflicts against Linus'
current
Hi Linus,
I've split out the big send/receive update from my last pull request and
now have just the fixes in my for-linus branch:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus
For anyone who wants send/receive updates, they are maintained as well.
But it is has
Hi Linus
I held off on my rc5 pull because I hit an oops during log recovery
after a crash. I wanted to make sure it wasn't a regression because
we have some logging fixes in here.
It turns out that a commit during the merge window just made it much
more likely to trigger directory logging
Hi Linus,
Please grab my for-linus branch:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus
This is a small pull with btrfs fixes. The biggest of the bunch is
another fix for the new backref walking code.
We're still hammering out one btrfs dio vs buffered reads
Hi Linus,
Please pull my for-linus branch:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus
The dates look like I had to rebase this morning because there was a compiler
warning for a printk arg that I had missed earlier.
These are all fixes, including one to
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 11:09 AM, Chris Mason chris.ma...@fusionio.com wrote:
Please pull my for-linus branch:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus
This seems to introduce a new warning:
In file included from fs/btrfs/ctree.c:22:0:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 05:57:42PM -0600, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 11:09 AM, Chris Mason chris.ma...@fusionio.com
wrote:
Please pull my for-linus branch:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git
for-linus
This seems to introduce a
Hi everyone,
My for-linus branch is updated for 3.5:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus
This includes a fairly large change from Josef around data writeback
completion. Before, the writeback wasn't completed until the metadata
insertions for the
Hi Chris,
Please apply following bug fix patch:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-btrfsm=18438913851w=2
([PATCH] btrfs: add missing unlocks to transaction abort paths)
Thanks,
Tsutomu
(2012/04/13 22:38), Chris Mason wrote:
Hi Linus,
My for-linus branch has btrfs fixes and updates:
Hi Linus,
My for-linus branch has btrfs fixes and updates:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus
The top commit is the only one that isn't strictly a bug fix. It
updates the btrfs metadata checker code to support metadata blocks
larger than the page
Hi Linus,
I have two additional and btrfs fixes in my for-linus branch
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus
One is a casting error that leads to memory corruption on i386 during
scrub, and the other fixes a corner case in the backref walking code
(also
Hi Linus,
Please pull the for-linus branch of the btrfs repo:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus
This is later than I wanted because I got backed up running through
btrfs bugs from the Oracle QA teams. But they are all bug fixes that
we've queued and
Hi, Chris and Oliva
On thu, 1 Dec 2011 10:39:55 -0500, Chris Mason wrote:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus
Has our current set of fixes. This is fairly small, Alexandre Oliva has
been chasing problems in our block allocator and kicked out
On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 04:10:49PM +0800, Miao Xie wrote:
Hi, Chris and Oliva
On thu, 1 Dec 2011 10:39:55 -0500, Chris Mason wrote:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git
for-linus
Has our current set of fixes. This is fairly small, Alexandre Oliva has
On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 08:14:13AM -0500, Chris Mason wrote:
On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 04:10:49PM +0800, Miao Xie wrote:
[PATCH 08/20] Btrfs: try to allocate from cluster even at LOOP_NO_EMPTY_SIZE
Thanks, I'll push this 08/20 out as well.
Please pick
Li Zefan: Btrfs: check if the
On Mon, 5 Dec 2011 08:14:13 -0500, Chris Mason wrote:
On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 04:10:49PM +0800, Miao Xie wrote:
Hi, Chris and Oliva
On thu, 1 Dec 2011 10:39:55 -0500, Chris Mason wrote:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git
for-linus
Has our current set of
Hi everyone,
The for-linus branch of the btrfs tree:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus
Has our current set of fixes. This is fairly small, Alexandre Oliva has
been chasing problems in our block allocator and kicked out important
fixes.
Jan Schmidt
Excerpts from Sage Weil's message of 2011-08-18 17:51:54 -0400:
Hi Chris, Josef,
Can some form of the clone ioctl transaction start reservation fix go in
soon as well? That hits a BUG_ON every time.
Sorry Sage, I thought I had that one. I'll get it in the next pull.
-chris
--
To
Hi Chris, Josef,
Can some form of the clone ioctl transaction start reservation fix go in
soon as well? That hits a BUG_ON every time.
Thanks!
sage
On Thu, 18 Aug 2011, Chris Mason wrote:
Hi everyone,
The for-linus branch of the btrfs-unstable tree:
On 07/10/2011 08:20 PM, Mitch Harder wrote:
On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 4:25 PM, Josef Bacik jo...@redhat.com wrote:
On 07/01/2011 04:39 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
Hey Chris,
Since I'm going on vacation next week I wanted to get everything ready for
you
in case you get bored with fsck and want to
On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 4:25 PM, Josef Bacik jo...@redhat.com wrote:
On 07/01/2011 04:39 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
Hey Chris,
Since I'm going on vacation next week I wanted to get everything ready for
you
in case you get bored with fsck and want to put together a 3.1 tree :). If
you
can
On 07/01/2011 04:39 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
Hey Chris,
Since I'm going on vacation next week I wanted to get everything ready for you
in case you get bored with fsck and want to put together a 3.1 tree :). If
you
can pull
Hey Chris,
Since I'm going on vacation next week I wanted to get everything ready for you
in case you get bored with fsck and want to put together a 3.1 tree :). If you
can pull
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/josef/btrfs-work.git for-chris
It is based on your for-linus branch.
Hi everyone,
The for-linus branch of the btrfs unstable tree:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git for-linus
Has our current set of fixes. Linus will probably notice the head
commit was from this morning. I reordered a refcount bump inside the
lock that
Hi everyone,
The for-linus branch of the btrfs unstable repo:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git for-linus
Has our current queue of fixes. One of the fixes removes our unused
sysfs code, mostly because gcc likes to complain about it since
we removed some
Hi everyone,
The for-linus branch of the btrfs unstable tree:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git for-linus
Has our current queue of fixes. Josef's is the biggest pile, mostly in
the allocator. Josef and I both managed to merge his patch to avoid
mapping the
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 4:57 AM, Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com wrote:
The for-linus branch of the btrfs unstable tree:
Chris, this is getting ridiculous.
You guys need to start honoring the merge window. None of these big
pulls afterwards. If the code wasn't ready, it damn well shouldn't
Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com writes:
Hi everyone,
The for-linus branch of the btrfs unstable tree:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git
for-linus
Has our current queue of fixes. Josef's is the biggest pile, mostly in
the allocator. Josef and I
Excerpts from Andi Kleen's message of 2011-06-12 21:02:54 -0400:
Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com writes:
Hi everyone,
The for-linus branch of the btrfs unstable tree:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git
for-linus
Has our current queue of
09:02, Andi Kleen wrote:
Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com writes:
Hi everyone,
The for-linus branch of the btrfs unstable tree:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git
for-linus
Has our current queue of fixes. Josef's is the biggest pile, mostly in
Hi everyone,
The for-linus branch of the btrfs unstable repo:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git for-linus
Has our collection of fixes. It's a little bigger than usual for rc2
because it includes Josef's queue of Btrfs changes. It seemed best to
split them
Hi everyone,
I always thought that I'd be retired and with my flying car at the
beach by the time 3.0 came out, but I've setup the for-linus branch of
the btrfs-unstable tree for pulling:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git for-linus
This pull request is
One question. Will the autodefrag option be snapshot aware? Would
enabling this option double the amount of used space if there is a
snapshot present?
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi everyone,
I always thought that I'd be retired and with my
Hi everyone,
The master branch of the btrfs unstable tree has a few more fixes:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git master
These include small fixes in the new per-file flags, an oops in
the btrfs acl code and ENOSPC fixes for mixed block groups (used in very
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Any plans to update the wiki ?
https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Changelog
:P
On 05/15/11 at 10:47am, Chris Mason wrote:
Hi everyone,
The master branch of the btrfs unstable tree has a few more fixes:
Hi everyone,
The master branch of the btrfs unstable repo:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git master
Has a few bug fixes. Josef fixed up a crash in the free space cache
error handling code, and it should close out the open bugs there.
Li Zefan found a slab
Excerpts from David Sterba's message of 2011-03-28 09:25:28 -0400:
Hi,
Chris, you did not add my sign-of on the unaligned fix I've posted, nor
the tested-by or reported-by. Looking again into the mail, it seems like
some automated-misprocessing picked the first part of the mail altough
Hi everyone,
The kernel.org mirror is making me pay for a mistake in my push last
night. I'm still waiting for it to update the mirrors with the correct
commits, so I've got the proper sha down below.
Linus, I've pushed out two branches for you, for-linus and
for-linus-unmerged
Hi,
Chris, you did not add my sign-of on the unaligned fix I've posted, nor
the tested-by or reported-by. Looking again into the mail, it seems like
some automated-misprocessing picked the first part of the mail altough
there was properly formated patch after '--' marker (and I've verified
this
On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 5:08 AM, Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com wrote:
Linus, I've pushed out two branches for you, for-linus and
for-linus-unmerged
Thanks. I took the unmerged one, because I do like to see what's going
on. But I did end up verifying the end result against your merge, and
David Sterba wrote:
Hi,
Chris, you did not add my sign-of on the unaligned fix I've posted, nor
the tested-by or reported-by. Looking again into the mail, it seems like
some automated-misprocessing picked the first part of the mail altough
there was properly formated patch after '--' marker
Hi everyone,
The master branch of the btrfs unstable tree has some important btrfs
fixes:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git master
I was seeing very rare metadata corruptions during long stress runs, and
eventually tracked it down to two different races in
On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 5:41 PM, Clemens Eisserer linuxhi...@gmail.com wrote:
E.g. suppose you have a LZO compressed file, then a program rewrites some
data which is in the middle of the file, and suppose the newly written data
is less compressible.
Any idea how this is handled? I would be
On 01/18/2011 04:22 PM, C Anthony Risinger wrote:
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 4:14 AM, Felix Blankefelixbla...@gmail.com wrote:
i don't know about the readonly snapshots, but the LZO stuff is a
mount option; should be in the pull.
and for the record, i'm totally stoked to run LZO on all my
Hi everyone,
The master branch of the btrfs unstable tree:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git master
Has an assortment of bug fixes. It includes some corruption fixes when
mounting the filesystem in degraded mode, and related oopsen as we try
to mount damaged
Hi everyone,
The master branch of the btrfs unstable tree:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git master
Has a collection of btrfs bug fixes.
The three most important fixes here address crashes in the btrfs
O_DIRECT code, add a migrate_page operation to avoid
Hi everyone,
There were some minor conflicts with Linus' current tree, so my branch
is merged with Linus' tree as of this morning.
It includes some new writeback helpers so that btrfs can kick off IO to
reclaim delalloc space. I bounced a few different interfaces off
Christoph before this one.
On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 6:51 AM, Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com wrote:
There were some minor conflicts with Linus' current tree, so my branch
is merged with Linus' tree as of this morning.
Gaah. Please don't do this. Unless it's a _really_ messy merge, I
really do want to do the merge.
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 6:15 PM, Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com wrote:
Btrfs: Fix block generation verification race (+1/-1)
This seems to cause a hang when there are parent transid verify failed errors.
Somebody on #btrfs told me to revert it, and at least the system
doesn't hang any
On Monday 14 June 2010 20:47:35 Chris Mason wrote:
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 03:24:19PM -0400, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
On Friday 11 June 2010 15:37:31 Chris Mason wrote:
Hello everyone,
The master branch of the btrfs-unstable tree is a collection of fixes
and cleanups, including two
On Friday 11 June 2010 15:37:31 Chris Mason wrote:
Hello everyone,
The master branch of the btrfs-unstable tree is a collection of fixes
and cleanups, including two btrfs regressions from rc1:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git master
One is an
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 03:24:19PM -0400, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
On Friday 11 June 2010 15:37:31 Chris Mason wrote:
Hello everyone,
The master branch of the btrfs-unstable tree is a collection of fixes
and cleanups, including two btrfs regressions from rc1:
Hello everyone,
The master branch of the btrfs-unstable tree is a collection of fixes
and cleanups, including two btrfs regressions from rc1:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git master
One is an freeing blocks on an FS converted from ext34 to btrfs,
and the
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com wrote:
The master branch of the btrfs-unstable tree is a collection of fixes
and cleanups, including two btrfs regressions from rc1:
Ok, no pulling then. See all the millions of threads how I wanted only
critical fixes for
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 12:43:10PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com wrote:
The master branch of the btrfs-unstable tree is a collection of fixes
and cleanups, including two btrfs regressions from rc1:
Ok, no pulling then.
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com wrote:
The others all fix oopsen or big problems, and I think fixing warnings
helps avoid false negatives as others look for real problems?
I'm happy to rebase out the 3 non-criticals.
There seems to be more than three
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 01:00:02PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com wrote:
The others all fix oopsen or big problems, and I think fixing warnings
helps avoid false negatives as others look for real problems?
I'm happy to
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 01:00:02PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com wrote:
The others all fix oopsen or big problems, and I think fixing warnings
helps avoid false negatives as others look for real problems?
I'm happy to
Hi, Chris
on 2010-5-27 23:15, Chris Mason wrote:
My commits here are just integrating the two and fixing a few bugs in
the result.
Zheng Yan (13) commits (+4076/-2679):
Btrfs: Integrate metadata reservation with start_transaction (+678/-528)
Btrfs: Update metadata reservation for
Hi everyone,
The master branch of the btrfs-unstable tree:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git master
Has the first round of btrfs updates for 2.6.35-rc. I still have some
pending fixes and patches queued up from other people, but this pull
request has the
On Thu, 27 May 2010, Chris Mason wrote:
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 2317
fs/btrfs/relocation.c | 1991 +
fs/btrfs/inode.c| 1797 +
fs/btrfs/file.c
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 10:18:04AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, 27 May 2010, Chris Mason wrote:
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 2317
fs/btrfs/relocation.c | 1991 +
fs/btrfs/inode.c
On Thu, 27 May 2010, Chris Mason wrote:
# git diff v2.6.34 HEAD | diffstat
That still has the potential to be wrong (but got the numbers I expected
this time). It will be wrong in several cases:
- diffstat has some random common prefix removal logic that I've never
figured out the
Hello everyone,
The master branch of the btrfs-unstable repo has a collection of fixes:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git master
Josef fixed a few different ENOSPC problems, and removed the mount -o
max_extent mount option, which was not used and didn't fit
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 05:01:50PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 03:18:07PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
Hello everyone,
The master branch of the btrfs unstable tree has a collection of fixes
and features:
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 03:18:07PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
Hello everyone,
The master branch of the btrfs unstable tree has a collection of fixes
and features:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git master
I've updated the master tree with 3 small fixes.
Hello everyone,
The master branch of the btrfs unstable tree has a collection of fixes
and features:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git master
If Linus decides this pull is too big/too late, we'll maintain a bug fix
only branch for .34 and keep this branch
Hello everyone,
The master branch of the btrfs unstable tree:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git master
Has a small collection of fixes. These are mostly bugs, but I put in
one of Josef's safer performance tweaks as well.
Aneesh Kumar K.V (1) commits
Hello everyone,
The btrfs-unstable master branch has some updates:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git master
It will pull into either 2.6.32 or 2.6.33-git.
These are bug fixes, mostly around btrfs multi-device code and replacing
failed drives. It also
Hello everyone,
The master branch of the btrfs unstable tree:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git master
Is against 2.6.32 but pulls cleanly into Linus' current git. These are
various bug fixes, nothing stands out but some are commonly hit.
The readdir fix
Hello everyone,
This btrfs update is mostly a collection of fixes. Josef has the
snapshot-supported yum update code pending, but I wanted to give that
some more time to cook before we send it out.
Linus please pull the for-linus branch of the btrfs-unstable tree
Hello everyone,
The master branch of the btrfs-unstable repo has an assortment of fixes
and speedups.
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git master
These are mostly minor fixes, but there is an important fix for using
btrfs and ceph together. Josef has a block
Hello everyone,
The master branch of btrfs-unstable:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git master
Has an assortment of bug fixes and performance improvements. We've
updated the btrfs fsync code to make sure we don't trigger log commits
when the file hasn't
Hello everyone,
Btrfs updates are in the master branch of the btrfs-unstable repo:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git master
This branch is still against 2.6.31, but git merging lets it work with
the code Linus has already pulled and merged into 2.6.32-rc
Hello everyone,
I've prepared the for-linus branch of the btrfs-unstable tree for
pulling:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git for-linus
The master branch has the same changes against 2.6.31, minus a cleanup
from Christoph that is 2.6.32-rc specific.
The big
Hello everyone,
We've added two small incrementals for the btrfs async block group
caching. One fixes a race between the caching thread and transaction
commit. We haven't seen this one triggered in testing, but it still is
a valid fix.
The second patch makes sure the caching threads don't
On Thu, Jul 02, 2009 at 03:10:35PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
Hello everyone,
Here are some btrfs updates. Most of them are small bug fixes, but the
large commit from Yan Zheng is step one in getting snapshot deletion
rolling. There is also has a nice CPU usage reduction for
streaming
On Thu, 11 Jun 2009, Chris Mason wrote:
Existing filesystems will be upgraded to the new format on the first
mount. All of your old data will still be there and still work
properly, but I strongly recommend a full backup before going to the new
code.
Auugh.
This is horrible. I just
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 02:55:33PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, 11 Jun 2009, Chris Mason wrote:
Existing filesystems will be upgraded to the new format on the first
mount. All of your old data will still be there and still work
properly, but I strongly recommend a full backup
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 02:55:33PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, 11 Jun 2009, Chris Mason wrote:
Existing filesystems will be upgraded to the new format on the first
mount. All of your old data will still be there and still work
properly, but I strongly recommend a full
Hello everyone,
This is a large pull request for btrfs, and it includes a forward
rolling format change. This means that once this code mounts a btrfs
filesystem, the older kernels won't be able to read it. Btrfs progs
v0.19 is required to read the new format.
Existing filesystems will be
97 matches
Mail list logo
