Daniel Blueman reported a bug with fio+balance on a ramdisk setup.
Basically what happens is the balance relocates a tree block which will drop
the implicit refs for all of its children and adds a full backref. Once the
block is relocated we have to add the implicit refs back, so when we cow the
b
One point regarding the merge: wouldn't it be better to put the seq as a sort
criterion at the end, so the merge can happen in one run through the list
instead of this potentially quadratic time? I've seen some warnings from CPU
stuck 22s which recovered after the test.
On 16.07.2012 09:41, Arne
On 14.07.2012 15:09, Josef Bacik wrote:
> Daniel Blueman reported a bug with fio+balance on a ramdisk setup.
> Basically what happens is the balance relocates a tree block which will drop
> the implicit refs for all of its children and adds a full backref. Once the
> block is relocated we have to
Daniel Blueman reported a bug with fio+balance on a ramdisk setup.
Basically what happens is the balance relocates a tree block which will drop
the implicit refs for all of its children and adds a full backref. Once the
block is relocated we have to add the implicit refs back, so when we cow the
b
On 12.07.2012 19:05, Josef Bacik wrote:
> Which test, 278 is an xfs specific test. Thanks,
Oops. The test finally made it into xfstests-dev as 276.
Sorry,
-Jan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More maj
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 07:19:29AM -0600, Jan Schmidt wrote:
> Hi Josef,
>
> I hit a warning with this patch on top of the current cmason/for-linus
> branch. Takes about 15 minutes to produce when running xfstest 278 in
> a loop and, in another shell, doing fsstress on the same volume to
> force m
Hi Josef,
I hit a warning with this patch on top of the current cmason/for-linus
branch. Takes about 15 minutes to produce when running xfstest 278 in
a loop and, in another shell, doing fsstress on the same volume to
force metadata modifications.
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
...
5032 } else if
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 01:39:42PM -0600, Arne Jansen wrote:
> On 07/10/2012 08:52 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > Daniel Blueman reported a bug with fio+balance on a ramdisk setup.
> > Basically what happens is the balance relocates a tree block which will drop
> > the implicit refs for all of its chil
On 07/10/2012 08:52 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
> Daniel Blueman reported a bug with fio+balance on a ramdisk setup.
> Basically what happens is the balance relocates a tree block which will drop
> the implicit refs for all of its children and adds a full backref. Once the
> block is relocated we have
Daniel Blueman reported a bug with fio+balance on a ramdisk setup.
Basically what happens is the balance relocates a tree block which will drop
the implicit refs for all of its children and adds a full backref. Once the
block is relocated we have to add the implicit refs back, so when we cow the
b
10 matches
Mail list logo
