On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 12:45:45PM -0700, Zach Brown wrote:
> --- a/utils.h
> +++ b/utils.h
> @@ -71,13 +71,17 @@ int check_mounted_where(int fd, const char *file, char
> *where, int size,
> int btrfs_device_already_in_root(struct btrfs_root *root, int fd,
>int sup
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 06:20:49PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 08:55:01AM -0700, Zach Brown wrote:
> > David, let me know if you want me to change anything or resend so you
> > don't have to pull this out of a reply in a thread.
>
> Thanks, I'm now aware of the patch in th
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 08:55:01AM -0700, Zach Brown wrote:
> David, let me know if you want me to change anything or resend so you
> don't have to pull this out of a reply in a thread.
Thanks, I'm now aware of the patch in the thread.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe l
> Great! Thanks Zach for your quick patch. it works.
Cool.
> > From 3d132362f4c87b065b63cb38726a030db2277919 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> >From: Zach Brown
> >Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014 12:32:00 -0700
> >Subject: [PATCH] btrfs-progs: use pretty printing macros
David, let me know if you want me to cha
Great! Thanks Zach for your quick patch. it works.
Anand
On 05/09/2014 03:45, Zach Brown wrote:
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 07:43:08PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
+ static __thread char _str[24];
This patch is causing segmentation fault as it reached maximum stack
depth on
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 07:43:08PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
>
>
> > + static __thread char _str[24];
>
> This patch is causing segmentation fault as it reached maximum stack
> depth on the sparc machine.
Sigh. I guess it was inevitable that this would fail somewhere :).
> Just ear
> + static __thread char _str[24];
This patch is causing segmentation fault as it reached maximum stack
depth on the sparc machine. Just earlier method of malloc is better ?
unless we want to change the stack depth. Any comments ?
Thanks, Anand
On 07/10/2013 10:30 PM, David Ster
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 05:16:23PM +0100, Hugo Mills wrote:
>Sorry to be a pain in the arse at this late stage of the patch, but
> I've only just noticed.
No worries, good to have this one fixed.
david
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a
Sorry to be a pain in the arse at this late stage of the patch, but
I've only just noticed.
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 04:30:15PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> static char *size_strs[] = { "", "KB", "MB", "GB", "TB",
> - "PB", "EB", "ZB", "YB"};
> -char *pretty_sizes(u64 si
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 11:31:17PM +0800, Wang Shilong wrote:
> Hello David,
>
> > From: Zach Brown
> >
> duplicate information.
git-send-email tricked me, the line is not present in thre tree
>
> > From: Zach Brown
> >
> > We don't need callers to manage string storage for each pretty_size
Hello David,
> From: Zach Brown
>
duplicate information.
> From: Zach Brown
>
> We don't need callers to manage string storage for each pretty_sizes()
> call. We can use a macro to have per-thread and per-call static storage
> so that pretty_sizes() can be used as many times as needed in pri
11 matches
Mail list logo
