Hi, Chris,
(2011/07/08 5:26), Chris Mason wrote:
> Excerpts from Tsutomu Itoh's message of 2011-07-01 04:11:28 -0400:
>> Hi, Miao,
>>
>> (2011/06/30 15:32), Miao Xie wrote:
>>> Hi, Itoh-san
>>>
>>> Could you test the following patch to check whether it can fix the bug or
>>> not?
>>> I have teste
Excerpts from Tsutomu Itoh's message of 2011-07-07 19:51:09 -0400:
> Hi, Chris,
>
> (2011/07/08 5:26), Chris Mason wrote:
> > Excerpts from Tsutomu Itoh's message of 2011-07-01 04:11:28 -0400:
> >> Hi, Miao,
> >>
> >> (2011/06/30 15:32), Miao Xie wrote:
> >>> Hi, Itoh-san
> >>>
> >>> Could you tes
Hi, Chris,
(2011/07/08 5:26), Chris Mason wrote:
> Excerpts from Tsutomu Itoh's message of 2011-07-01 04:11:28 -0400:
>> Hi, Miao,
>>
>> (2011/06/30 15:32), Miao Xie wrote:
>>> Hi, Itoh-san
>>>
>>> Could you test the following patch to check whether it can fix the bug or
>>> not?
>>> I have teste
Excerpts from Tsutomu Itoh's message of 2011-07-01 04:11:28 -0400:
> Hi, Miao,
>
> (2011/06/30 15:32), Miao Xie wrote:
> > Hi, Itoh-san
> >
> > Could you test the following patch to check whether it can fix the bug or
> > not?
> > I have tested it on my x86_64 machine by your test script for two
Hi, Miao,
(2011/06/30 15:32), Miao Xie wrote:
> Hi, Itoh-san
>
> Could you test the following patch to check whether it can fix the bug or not?
> I have tested it on my x86_64 machine by your test script for two days, it
> worked well.
I ran my test script about a day, I was not able to reprodu
On thu, 30 Jun 2011 16:03:21 +0800, Miao Xie wrote:
> Hi, Chris
>
> I think the snapshot should be the image of the fs tree before it was created,
> so the metadata of the snapshot should not exist in the its tree. But now, we
> found the directory item and directory name index is in both the snap
Hi, Chris
I think the snapshot should be the image of the fs tree before it was created,
so the metadata of the snapshot should not exist in the its tree. But now, we
found the directory item and directory name index is in both the snapshot tree
and the fs tree.
Besides that, it also makes the us
(2011/06/30 15:32), Miao Xie wrote:
> Hi, Itoh-san
>
> Could you test the following patch to check whether it can fix the bug or not?
Sure.
After running my test script by about a day, I will report on the result.
Thanks,
Tsutomu
> I have tested it on my x86_64 machine by your test script for t
Hi, Itoh-san
Could you test the following patch to check whether it can fix the bug or not?
I have tested it on my x86_64 machine by your test script for two days, it
worked well.
Thanks
Miao
Subject: [PATCH] btrfs: fix oops when doing space balance
When doing space balance, the following oops
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 10:15:30 +0900, Tsutomu Itoh wrote:
[SNIP]
> Bad news.
>
> I changed my test environment to 'btrfs-unstable + for-linus', I encountered
> following panic without inode_cache. (in about 4 hours after test begins)
>
> btrfs: relocating block group 49161437184 flags 9
> btrfs: fo
(2011/06/21 9:40), Chris Mason wrote:
> Excerpts from David Sterba's message of 2011-06-20 20:24:35 -0400:
>> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 08:41:39AM +0900, Tsutomu Itoh wrote:
>>> (2011/06/19 13:34), Tsutomu Itoh wrote:
> I've fixed this up by moving the delayed metadata run down into the
> sna
Excerpts from David Sterba's message of 2011-06-20 20:24:35 -0400:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 08:41:39AM +0900, Tsutomu Itoh wrote:
> > (2011/06/19 13:34), Tsutomu Itoh wrote:
> > >> I've fixed this up by moving the delayed metadata run down into the
> > >> snapshot creation code, please take a look
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 08:41:39AM +0900, Tsutomu Itoh wrote:
> (2011/06/19 13:34), Tsutomu Itoh wrote:
> >> I've fixed this up by moving the delayed metadata run down into the
> >> snapshot creation code, please take a look. If nobody objects I'll have
> >> this in the pull I send to Linus this w
(2011/06/19 13:34), Tsutomu Itoh wrote:
> Hi, Chris,
>
> (2011/06/18 6:12), Chris Mason wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I think I tracked down the oops we were seeing Tsutomu Itoh's balance
>> test. The delayed metadata insertion code was allowing delayed updates
>> to queue up and be process after
Hi, Chris,
(2011/06/18 6:12), Chris Mason wrote:
Hi everyone,
I think I tracked down the oops we were seeing Tsutomu Itoh's balance
test. The delayed metadata insertion code was allowing delayed updates
to queue up and be process after the snapshot was created.
I've fixed this up by moving th
Hi everyone,
I think I tracked down the oops we were seeing Tsutomu Itoh's balance
test. The delayed metadata insertion code was allowing delayed updates
to queue up and be process after the snapshot was created.
I've fixed this up by moving the delayed metadata run down into the
snapshot creati
16 matches
Mail list logo
