On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 11:36:30PM -0700, Anatol Pomozov wrote:
Hi, Btrfs developers
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 9:03 PM, Anatol Pomozov anatol.pomo...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi,
I have a home server on Linux Arch (kernel 3.11.2) that uses
multi-device btrfs on root filesystem.
Until
On Mon, 7 Oct 2013 13:07:25 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
I think the wiki has descriptions for check_int and check_int_data reversed:
I've fixed it in the wiki. Thanks!
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
On Mon, 7 Oct 2013 14:42:55 -0700, Zach Brown wrote:
Check for fopen() failure. This shows up in static analysis as a
possible null pointer derference.
Signed-off-by: Zach Brown z...@redhat.com
---
cmds-send.c | 5 +
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/cmds-send.c
After commit de78b51a2852bddccd6535e9e12de65f92787a1e
(btrfs: remove cache only arguments from defrag path), @blockptr is no more
used.
Signed-off-by: Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com
---
fs/btrfs/ctree.c | 2 --
1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.c b/fs/btrfs/ctree.c
index
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 06:19:30PM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
We can't defrag the extent root without deadlock.
Deadlock under what circumstance? Eg. with snapshot aware defag turned
on or extent tree cannot be safely defragmented at all?
david
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 03:21:38PM +0800, Wang Shilong wrote:
+static void print_parent_column(struct btrfs_qgroup *qgroup)
+{
+ struct btrfs_qgroup_list *list = NULL;
+
+ list_for_each_entry(list, qgroup-qgroups, next_qgroup) {
+ printf(%llu/%llu, (list-qgroup)-qgroupid
On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 03:21:39PM +0800, Wang Shilong wrote:
From: Wang Shilong wangsl-f...@cn.fujitsu.com
This patch introduces '-c' option to print the ID of the child qgroups.
You may use it like:
btrfs qgroup show -c path
I haven't looked closely, but using -c leads probably to a
Hello Josef,
your patch fixed the issue.
Greetings,
Jan
On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 4:20 AM, Josef Bacik jba...@fusionio.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 12:36:11AM +0200, Jan Killius wrote:
Hello,
I'm hitting similar bug with the patch from Lui Bo.
But If I revert:
On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 03:21:46PM +0800, Wang Shilong wrote:
You can use it like:
btrfs qgroup show --block-size=m mnt
Here, block size supports k/K/m/M/g/G/t/T/p/P/e/E.
There is no distinction between the 1000 and 1024 based prefixes, also
no way to get the raw values in bytes. I
Thanks for finding this, the problem comes to patch [v3 9/12].
When updating max columns len of child_qgroup, i miswrite qgroup-member to
qgroup-parent, i have updated this patch and send a v4, it can be
appiled without conflicts with later.
Thanks,
Wang
2013/10/8 David Sterba dste...@suse.cz:
Sorry, This should to reply to the bug that you find, not this thread.
Anyway, you are smart enough to get this .
2013/10/9 Shilong Wang wangshilong1...@gmail.com:
Thanks for finding this, the problem comes to patch [v3 9/12].
When updating max columns len of child_qgroup, i miswrite
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 12:27:23AM +0800, Shilong Wang wrote:
Thanks for finding this, the problem comes to patch [v3 9/12].
When updating max columns len of child_qgroup, i miswrite qgroup-member to
qgroup-parent, i have updated this patch and send a v4, it can be
appiled without conflicts
From: Wang Shilong wangsl-f...@cn.fujitsu.com
This patch enhance to print the result as a table.
You can use it like:
btrfs qgroup show path
However, to table the result better, we make '-p' and '-c' not present
at the same time.
For example:
btrfs qgroup show -pr path
The
On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 02:42:53PM -0700, Zach Brown wrote:
Eric imported a newer git snapshot of btrfs-progs into Red Hat's
universe which kicked off a static analysis run which found a bunch
of problems. This series is my attempt to fix the warnings that I
agreed were either real bugs or
On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 10:47:56AM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
I was also thinking if this should be inside kernel
facilitated by a new ioctl? so that we avoid number
of search ioctl thats required.
I think so. And for the feature itself, it can be handy in case where
qgroups are not
Hi David,
2013/10/8 David Sterba dste...@suse.cz:
On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 03:21:46PM +0800, Wang Shilong wrote:
You can use it like:
btrfs qgroup show --block-size=m mnt
Here, block size supports k/K/m/M/g/G/t/T/p/P/e/E.
There is no distinction between the 1000 and 1024 based
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 12:54:03AM +0800, Shilong Wang wrote:
Hi David,
2013/10/8 David Sterba dste...@suse.cz:
On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 03:21:46PM +0800, Wang Shilong wrote:
You can use it like:
btrfs qgroup show --block-size=m mnt
Here, block size supports
And close(fd) is already called 4 lines above. You didn't run the static
code analysis again after applying your patch :)
Nice, thanks for catching that. I certainly didn't run it again, no :).
- z
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 06:01:57PM +0100, Hugo Mills wrote:
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 12:54:03AM +0800, Shilong Wang wrote:
Hi David,
2013/10/8 David Sterba dste...@suse.cz:
On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 03:21:46PM +0800, Wang Shilong wrote:
You can use it like:
btrfs qgroup show
@@ -72,6 +72,11 @@ int find_mount_root(const char *path, char **mount_root)
close(fd);
mnttab = fopen(/proc/mounts, r);
+ if (!mnttab) {
+ close(fd);
+ return -errno;
close() can modify errno.
And close(fd) is already called 4 lines above. You
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 09:21:15AM +0800, Gui Hecheng wrote:
Originally, when executing btrfs balance right after
btrfs subvolume snaphot btrfs subvolume delete,
a kernel BUG arises.
This problem is caused by the patch:
[PATCH 1/2] Btrfs: fix for patch cleanup: don't check
the same thing
Liu fixed part of this problem and unfortunately I steered him in slightly the
wrong direction and so didn't completely fix the problem. The problem is we
limit the size of the delalloc range we are looking for to max bytes and then we
try to lock that range. If we fail to lock the pages in that
Compile-tested!
Cool, thanks!
[02/12] not merged, [08/12] replaces chandan's commit
I just sent another attempt at 02/ :).
- z
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at
I don't think this is expected, is it? I can no longer move a subvolume into
another subvolume. I can move a subvolume into a directory. This happens with
3.11.3, and 3.12 rc4. I'm not sure yet when the regression first appeared.
Example move subvol to subvol, where home is a subvolume that
On Oct 8, 2013, at 3:58 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
I don't think this is expected, is it? I can no longer move a subvolume into
another subvolume. I can move a subvolume into a directory.
So far this isn't working with 3.10.14 or 3.9.11.
The file system and subvolumes
On Oct 8, 2013, at 4:29 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
So I think I need to go back to an older btrfs-progs. Or I need a new brain.
OK I'm losing it. New file system created with:
btrfs-progs-0.20.rc1.20130501git7854c8b-4.fc20.x86_64
3.11.3-301.fc20.x86_64
I still can't move
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 03:58:23PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
I don't think this is expected, is it? I can no longer move a
subvolume into another subvolume. I can move a subvolume into a
directory. This happens with 3.11.3, and 3.12 rc4. I'm not sure yet
when the regression first appeared.
On Tue, 2013-10-08 at 13:21 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 09:21:15AM +0800, Gui Hecheng wrote:
Originally, when executing btrfs balance right after
btrfs subvolume snaphot btrfs subvolume delete,
a kernel BUG arises.
This problem is caused by the patch:
[PATCH
Originally, when executing btrfs balance right after
btrfs subvolume snaphot btrfs subvolume delete,
a kernel BUG arises.
This problem is caused by the patch:
[PATCH 1/2] Btrfs: fix for patch cleanup: don't check
the same thing twice
The commit id: 48475471728f060bfd2e686f592ef208d3ba8b7d
(in
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 04:16:23PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 06:19:30PM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
We can't defrag the extent root without deadlock.
Deadlock under what circumstance? Eg. with snapshot aware defag turned
on or extent tree cannot be safely defragmented at
30 matches
Mail list logo
