Hello Josef,
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 3:52 PM, Josef Bacik jba...@fusionio.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 06:52:37PM -0700, Liu Bo wrote:
An user reported that he has hit an annoying deadlock while playing with
ceph based on btrfs.
Current updating device tree requires space from METADATA
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/18/2014 10:47 AM, Alex Lyakas wrote:
Hello Josef,
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 3:52 PM, Josef Bacik jba...@fusionio.com
wrote:
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 06:52:37PM -0700, Liu Bo wrote:
An user reported that he has hit an annoying deadlock
Hi Josef,
is this the commit to look at:
6df9a95e63395f595d0d1eb5d561dd6c91c40270 Btrfs: make the chunk
allocator completely tree lockless
or some other commits are also relevant?
Alex.
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 6:06 PM, Josef Bacik jba...@fb.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/18/2014 11:24 AM, Alex Lyakas wrote:
Hi Josef, is this the commit to look at:
6df9a95e63395f595d0d1eb5d561dd6c91c40270 Btrfs: make the chunk
allocator completely tree lockless
or some other commits are also relevant?
It's been so long
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 02:37:40PM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
On 01/30/2013 09:38 AM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 04:05:17PM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
On 01/29/2013 01:04 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 11:41:10AM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
On 01/28/2013
On 01/31/2013 08:33 AM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 02:37:40PM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
On 01/30/2013 09:38 AM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 04:05:17PM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
On 01/29/2013 01:04 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 11:41:10AM -0700,
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 04:05:17PM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
On 01/29/2013 01:04 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 11:41:10AM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
On 01/28/2013 02:23 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 11:44:46AM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
Hi Josef,
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 04:05:17PM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
On 01/29/2013 01:04 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 11:41:10AM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
On 01/28/2013 02:23 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 11:44:46AM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
Hi Josef,
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 04:05:17PM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
On 01/29/2013 01:04 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 11:41:10AM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
On 01/28/2013 02:23 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 11:44:46AM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
Hi Josef,
On 01/30/2013 09:38 AM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 04:05:17PM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
On 01/29/2013 01:04 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 11:41:10AM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
On 01/28/2013 02:23 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 11:44:46AM
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 02:37:40PM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
On 01/30/2013 09:38 AM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 04:05:17PM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
On 01/29/2013 01:04 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 11:41:10AM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
On 01/28/2013
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 07:30:09PM -0700, Liu Bo wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 04:23:31PM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 11:44:46AM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
Hi Josef,
Thanks for the patch - sorry for the long delay in testing...
Jim,
I've been trying
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 08:47:30AM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 07:30:09PM -0700, Liu Bo wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 04:23:31PM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 11:44:46AM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
Hi Josef,
Thanks for the patch - sorry
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 08:50:34AM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 08:47:30AM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
251 [not run] FSTRIM is not supported
Are you sure its 251? Thanks,
Sorry it's early, I need a device that does trim. /me waits for his fusion
card
to get
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 05:43:31PM +0100, David Sterba wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 08:50:34AM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
You can use scsi_debug device with
parm: lbpu:enable LBP, support UNMAP command (def=0) (int)
Also, loop device with a file backed by a filesystem with hole
On 01/28/2013 02:23 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 11:44:46AM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
Hi Josef,
Thanks for the patch - sorry for the long delay in testing...
Jim,
I've been trying to reason out how this happens, could you do a btrfs fi df on
the filesystem thats giving
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 11:41:10AM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
On 01/28/2013 02:23 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 11:44:46AM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
Hi Josef,
Thanks for the patch - sorry for the long delay in testing...
Jim,
I've been trying to reason out how
On 01/29/2013 01:04 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 11:41:10AM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
On 01/28/2013 02:23 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 11:44:46AM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
Hi Josef,
Thanks for the patch - sorry for the long delay in testing...
Jim,
I've
On 01/29/2013 01:04 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 11:41:10AM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
On 01/28/2013 02:23 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 11:44:46AM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
Hi Josef,
Thanks for the patch - sorry for the long delay in testing...
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 11:44:46AM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
Hi Josef,
Thanks for the patch - sorry for the long delay in testing...
Jim,
I've been trying to reason out how this happens, could you do a btrfs fi df on
the filesystem thats giving you trouble so I can see if what I think is
On 01/28/2013 02:23 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 11:44:46AM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
Hi Josef,
Thanks for the patch - sorry for the long delay in testing...
Jim,
I've been trying to reason out how this happens, could you do a btrfs fi df on
the filesystem thats giving
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 04:23:31PM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 11:44:46AM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
Hi Josef,
Thanks for the patch - sorry for the long delay in testing...
Jim,
I've been trying to reason out how this happens, could you do a btrfs fi df on
the
Hi Josef,
Thanks for the patch - sorry for the long delay in testing...
On 12/18/2012 06:52 AM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 06:52:37PM -0700, Liu Bo wrote:
An user reported that he has hit an annoying deadlock while playing with
ceph based on btrfs.
Current updating device
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 06:52:37PM -0700, Liu Bo wrote:
An user reported that he has hit an annoying deadlock while playing with
ceph based on btrfs.
Current updating device tree requires space from METADATA chunk,
so we -may- need to do a recursive chunk allocation when adding/updating
dev
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 07:47:51AM -0700, Liu Bo wrote:
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 08:52:42AM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 06:52:37PM -0700, Liu Bo wrote:
An user reported that he has hit an annoying deadlock while playing with
ceph based on btrfs.
Current
An user reported that he has hit an annoying deadlock while playing with
ceph based on btrfs.
Current updating device tree requires space from METADATA chunk,
so we -may- need to do a recursive chunk allocation when adding/updating
dev extent, that is where the deadlock comes from.
If we use
26 matches
Mail list logo