On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 4:48 AM, Eryu Guan wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 12:52:47PM +0100, fdman...@kernel.org wrote:
>> From: Filipe Manana
>>
>> This test is motivated by an issue found in btrfs.
>>
>> It tests that after syncing the filesystem, adding a xattr to a file,
>> syncing the files
Vincent Olivier posted on Wed, 17 Jun 2015 09:46:50 -0400 as excerpted:
>> On Jun 16, 2015, at 7:58 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>> Yes. GlobalReserve is for short-term btrfs-internal use, reserved for
>> times when btrfs needs to (temporarily) allocate some space in ordered
>> to
Hi all,
My colleagues are working on adding btrfs support to libguestfs.
But just like Pino's complain, even in v4.1-rc1 btrfs-progs we reworked
some UI of mkfs, the output from other btrfs subcommands still have
their own output format.
Any idea to provide a unified output format for all b
On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 12:49:23PM +0100, fdman...@kernel.org wrote:
> From: Filipe Manana
>
> If we do an append write to a file (which increases its inode's i_size)
> that does not have the flag BTRFS_INODE_NEEDS_FULL_SYNC set in its inode,
> and the previous transaction added a new hard link t
On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 8:46 PM, Marc MERLIN wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 03:19:06PM +0300, Robert Munteanu wrote:
>> Hi,
>
> Note to others: kernel 4.0.4
>
> Reply to you:
> I tried ext4 to btrfs once a year ago and it severely mangled my
> filesystem.
> I looked at it as a cool feature/hack
On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 9:48 PM, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 6/12/15 8:19 AM, Robert Munteanu wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have converted my root ext4 partition to btrfs. I used an USB
>> stick to boot and used btrfs-convert.
>>
>> I also did a balance and
From: Filipe Manana
After commit 4f764e515361 ("Btrfs: remove deleted xattrs on fsync log
replay"), we can end up in a situation where during log replay we end up
deleting xattrs that were never deleted when their file was last fsynced.
This happens in the fast fsync path (flag BTRFS_INODE_NEEDS
Moving the discussion to fsdevel.
Summary: disabling MS_I_VERSION brings some speedups to btrfs, but the
generic 'noiversion' option cannot be used to achieve that. It is
processed before it reaches btrfs superblock callback, where
MS_I_VERSION is forced.
The proposed fix is to add btrfs-specific
On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 9:34 PM, Qu Wenruo
wrote:
Ping?
New new comments?
As our block sizes get bigger, it makes sense to think about more fine
grained checksums. We're using crcs for:
1) memory corruption on the way down to the storage. We could be very
small (bitflips) or smaller
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 01:59:13AM +0200, Robert Marklund wrote:
> This could crash before because of dangerous dangling
> offset of pointer.
That's right, this can happen. There are more btrfs_item_ptr that would
be good to validate that way, namely in the checker as it's most likely
to see corru
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 11:57:46AM -0400, Facebook wrote:
> > New new comments?
>
> As our block sizes get bigger, it makes sense to think about more fine
> grained checksums. We're using crcs for:
>
> 1) memory corruption on the way down to the storage. We could be very
> small (bitflips) or
On 06/18/2015 09:44 AM, David Sterba wrote:
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 01:59:13AM +0200, Robert Marklund wrote:
This could crash before because of dangerous dangling
offset of pointer.
That's right, this can happen. There are more btrfs_item_ptr that would
be good to validate that way, namely in
On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 10:21:45PM +0100, Mike Fleetwood wrote:
> It also upper cases the UUID where as btrfs fi sh and blkid don't.
Ok, I'll switch that to lowercase so it's consistent with the rest.
> I've done a quick test on changing the UUID of a btrfs. It worked, but
> btrfstune -u didn't
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 4:21 AM, Robbie Ko wrote:
> Hi Filipe,
>
> I've found that the following case is the main cause of such error
> and it's fs tree is shown via btrfs-debug-tress as below.
>
> file tree key (459 ROOT_ITEM 20487)
> node 132988928 level 1 items 3 free 490 generation 20487 owner
Hi Chris,
The following fixes are based on top of my patch titled "btrfs:
Handle unaligned length in extent_same" which you have in your
'integration-4.2' branch:
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git/commit/?id=e1d227a42ea2b4664f94212bd1106b9a3413ffb8
The first p
In the case that we dedupe the tail of a file, we might expand the dedupe
len out to the end of our last block. We don't want to compare data past
i_size however, so pass the original length to btrfs_cmp_data().
Signed-off-by: Mark Fasheh
---
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertion
->readpage() does page_lock() before extent_lock(), we do the opposite in
extent-same. We want to reverse the order in btrfs_extent_same() but it's
not quite straightforward since the page locks are taken inside
btrfs_cmp_data().
So I split btrfs_cmp_data() into 3 parts with a small context struc
There's an awkward asymmetry between btrfs device add and btrfs device
delete. Resolve this by aliasing delete to remove.
Signed-off-by: Omar Sandoval
---
Documentation/btrfs-device.asciidoc | 5 -
cmds-device.c | 33 +++--
2 files changed,
One of my btrfs partition seems to have been corrupted.
Since I've tried to balance it, I can only mount it read-only. I have been able
to use it read-only without problem so far so the data seems safe.
When I remove the "ro" option, the "mount" command hangs and some programs do
not function
David Sterba wrote on 2015/06/18 19:06 +0200:
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 11:57:46AM -0400, Facebook wrote:
New new comments?
As our block sizes get bigger, it makes sense to think about more fine
grained checksums. We're using crcs for:
1) memory corruption on the way down to the storage. We
David Sterba wrote on 2015/06/18 19:33 +0200:
On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 10:21:45PM +0100, Mike Fleetwood wrote:
It also upper cases the UUID where as btrfs fi sh and blkid don't.
Ok, I'll switch that to lowercase so it's consistent with the rest.
I've done a quick test on changing the UUID o
In some cases, we may not want to enable automatic defragmentation for
the whole filesystem with the "autodefrag" mount option but we still
want to defragment specific files or directories. Add an inode flag
which allows us to do specify that.
Signed-off-by: Omar Sandoval
---
fs/btrfs/ctree.h
The original implement doesn't output nbytes in btrfs_inode.
Add the output and since the output is too long, reformat it to multi
lines.
This is very handy to debug related bugs.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
---
print-tree.c | 5 -
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/p
Some unknown kernel bug makes inode nbytes modification out of sync with
file extent update.
But it's quite easy to fix in btrfs-progs anyway.
So just fix it by adding a new function repair_inode_nbytes by using the
found_size in inode_record.
Reported-by: Christian
Reported-by: Chris Murphy
S
On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 08:52:36PM +0530, Chandan Rajendra wrote:
> For the subpagesize-blocksize scenario, a page can contain multiple
> blocks. In such cases, this patch handles reading data from files.
>
> To track the status of individual blocks of a page, this patch makes use of a
> bitmap po
OK, it's 4.2 merge windows now...
But still no new comments?
Thanks,
Qu
Qu Wenruo wrote on 2015/05/15 14:47 +0800:
Ping.
Any comments?
Other v7 patchset is reviewed by David.
But I didn't find it in 4.1 merge windows.
Is something wrong or we are waiting for the vfs patch merged first?
Than
Any new comments?
BTW, who is responsible to merge the vfs change patch?
Should btrfs maintainers to merge it or vfs maintainer?
Thanks,
Qu
Qu Wenruo wrote on 2015/02/06 13:45 +0800:
There are sysfs interfaces in some fs, only btrfs yet, which will modify
on-disk data.
Unlike normal file opera
27 matches
Mail list logo
