On 2018年08月01日 11:45, MegaBrutal wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I know it's a decade-old question, but I'd like to hear your thoughts
> of today. By now, I became a heavy BTRFS user. Almost everywhere I use
> BTRFS, except in situations when it is obvious there is no benefit
> (e.g. /var/log, /boot). At h
On 2018年08月01日 22:33, Remi Gauvin wrote:
> On 2018-07-31 11:45 PM, MegaBrutal wrote:
>
>> I know that with nodatacow, I take away most of the benefits of BTRFS
>> (those are actually hurting database performance – the exact CoW
>> nature that is elsewhere a blessing, with databases it's a drawba
Cleanup patch and no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Misono Tomohiro
---
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 6 ++
fs/btrfs/scrub.c | 8 ++--
fs/btrfs/super.c | 9 +++--
fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 21 ++---
4 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrf
On 2018年08月01日 21:45, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>
>
> On 2018年08月01日 21:27, David Sterba wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 02:52:23PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>>> [BUG]
>>> For certains crafted image, whose csum root leaf has missing backref, if
>>> we try to trigger write with data csum, it could cause
The error handling in "goto out;" expects that if "trans" is non-NULL
that means it's valid. Unfortunately it could also be an error pointer.
Fixes: c9a6fe84fe43 ("btrfs: qgroups: Move transaction management inside
btrfs_quota_enable/disable")
Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter
diff --git a/fs/btrfs
On 2018年08月02日 15:19, Misono Tomohiro wrote:
> Cleanup patch and no functional changes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Misono Tomohiro
Looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo
Thanks,
Qu
> ---
> fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 6 ++
> fs/btrfs/scrub.c | 8 ++--
> fs/btrfs/super.c | 9 +++--
>
Hugo Mills - 01.08.18, 10:56:
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2018 at 05:45:15AM +0200, MegaBrutal wrote:
> > I know it's a decade-old question, but I'd like to hear your
> > thoughts
> > of today. By now, I became a heavy BTRFS user. Almost everywhere I
> > use BTRFS, except in situations when it is obvious the
On 08/01/2018 10:29 PM, David Sterba wrote:
On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 02:53:32PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
From: Anand Jain
%fs_devices can be free-ed by btrfs_free_stale_devices() when the
close_fs_devices() drops fs_devices::opened to zero, but close_fs_devices
tries to access the %fs_device
When the replace is running the fs_devices::num_devices also includes
the replace device, however in some operations like device delete and
balance it needs the actual num_devices without the repalce devices, so
now the function btrfs_num_devices() just provides that.
And here is a scenario how ba
On 08/01/2018 10:41 PM, David Sterba wrote:
On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 02:53:34PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
When the replace is running the fs_devices::num_devices also includes
the replace device, however in some operations like device delete and
balance it needs the actual num_devices without t
On 2.08.2018 13:09, Anand Jain wrote:
> When the replace is running the fs_devices::num_devices also includes
> the replace device, however in some operations like device delete and
> balance it needs the actual num_devices without the repalce devices, so
> now the function btrfs_num_devices()
On 08/02/2018 11:16 AM, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> However I wonder: Is this it? Is there nothing that can be improved in
> BTRFS to handle database and VM files in a better way, without altering
> any default settings?
Poor performance is not the biggest BTRFS problem, it's known for silent da
On 2.08.2018 11:44, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> The error handling in "goto out;" expects that if "trans" is non-NULL
> that means it's valid. Unfortunately it could also be an error pointer.
>
> Fixes: c9a6fe84fe43 ("btrfs: qgroups: Move transaction management inside
> btrfs_quota_enable/disable
Отправлено с iPhone
> 2 авг. 2018 г., в 12:16, Martin Steigerwald написал(а):
>
> Hugo Mills - 01.08.18, 10:56:
>>> On Wed, Aug 01, 2018 at 05:45:15AM +0200, MegaBrutal wrote:
>>> I know it's a decade-old question, but I'd like to hear your
>>> thoughts
>>> of today. By now, I became a heavy
Andrei Borzenkov - 02.08.18, 12:35:
> Отправлено с iPhone
>
> > 2 авг. 2018 г., в 12:16, Martin Steigerwald
> > написал(а):>
> > Hugo Mills - 01.08.18, 10:56:
> >>> On Wed, Aug 01, 2018 at 05:45:15AM +0200, MegaBrutal wrote:
> >>> I know it's a decade-old question, but I'd like to hear your
> >>
Отправлено с iPhone
> 2 авг. 2018 г., в 10:02, Qu Wenruo написал(а):
>
>
>
>> On 2018年08月01日 11:45, MegaBrutal wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I know it's a decade-old question, but I'd like to hear your thoughts
>> of today. By now, I became a heavy BTRFS user. Almost everywhere I use
>> BTRFS, e
On 2018年08月02日 18:35, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
>
>
> Отправлено с iPhone
>
>> 2 авг. 2018 г., в 12:16, Martin Steigerwald написал(а):
>>
>> Hugo Mills - 01.08.18, 10:56:
On Wed, Aug 01, 2018 at 05:45:15AM +0200, MegaBrutal wrote:
I know it's a decade-old question, but I'd like to hea
On 2018年08月02日 18:45, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
>
>
> Отправлено с iPhone
>
>> 2 авг. 2018 г., в 10:02, Qu Wenruo написал(а):
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 2018年08月01日 11:45, MegaBrutal wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I know it's a decade-old question, but I'd like to hear your thoughts
>>> of today. By now, I be
On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 05:34:54PM +0900, Misono Tomohiro wrote:
> to correctly count num_entries.
> (I noticed that num_entries went to negative value when I'm running gdb)
>
> However, num_entries is actually not used in progs at all (it is used for
> throttling in kernel), so maybe we can just
On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 01:11:40PM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>
>
> On 2.08.2018 13:09, Anand Jain wrote:
> > When the replace is running the fs_devices::num_devices also includes
> > the replace device, however in some operations like device delete and
> > balance it needs the actual num_dev
On 2018-08-02 06:56, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2018年08月02日 18:45, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
Отправлено с iPhone
2 авг. 2018 г., в 10:02, Qu Wenruo написал(а):
On 2018年08月01日 11:45, MegaBrutal wrote:
Hi all,
I know it's a decade-old question, but I'd like to hear your thoughts
of today. By no
On 2018-08-02 03:07 AM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> For data, since we have cow (along with csum), it should be no problem
> to recover.
>
> And since datacow is used, transaction on each device should be atomic,
> thus we should be able to handle one-time device out-of-sync case.
> (For multiple out-of-
On 08/02/2018 08:21 PM, David Sterba wrote:
On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 01:11:40PM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
On 2.08.2018 13:09, Anand Jain wrote:
When the replace is running the fs_devices::num_devices also includes
the replace device, however in some operations like device delete and
ba
On 02.08.2018 14:27 Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
> On 2018-08-02 06:56, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>>
>> On 2018年08月02日 18:45, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
>>>
>>> Отправлено с iPhone
>>>
2 авг. 2018 г., в 10:02, Qu Wenruo
написал(а):
> On 2018年08月01日 11:45, MegaBrutal wrote:
> Hi all,
On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 11:44:29AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> The error handling in "goto out;" expects that if "trans" is non-NULL
> that means it's valid. Unfortunately it could also be an error pointer.
>
> Fixes: c9a6fe84fe43 ("btrfs: qgroups: Move transaction management inside
> btrfs_qu
On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 04:19:07PM +0900, Misono Tomohiro wrote:
> Cleanup patch and no functional changes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Misono Tomohiro
Nice. Added to misc-next, thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.ke
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 10:59:06AM +0100, fdman...@kernel.org wrote:
> From: Filipe Manana
>
> If we end up with logging an inode reference item which has the same name
> but different index from the one we have persisted, we end up failing when
> replaying the log with an errno value of -EEXIST.
On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 12:39:58PM +0100, fdman...@kernel.org wrote:
> From: Filipe Manana
>
> When doing an incremental send, if we have a file in the parent snapshot
> that has prealloc extents beyond EOF and in the send snapshot it got a
> hole punch that partially covers the prealloc extents,
FYI: According to ddrescue, there were read errors in +45% of the
partition. There were no chances to save anything from the disk.
2018-08-01 15:07 GMT+03:00 Cerem Cem ASLAN :
> Yes, command output is as is, because I just copied and pasted into the
> mail. When I omit the `-t btrfs` part, result
On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 01:55:23PM +0800, Huang, Ying wrote:
> "Huang, Ying" writes:
>
> > Hi, Chris,
> >
> > Chris Mason writes:
> >
> >> On 19 Jun 2018, at 23:51, Huang, Ying wrote:
> > "Huang, Ying" writes:
> >
> >> Hi, Josef,
> >>
> >> Do you have time to take a look at
On Wed, Aug 01, 2018 at 10:37:15AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> The branch can be fetched from the following git repo:
> https://github.com/adam900710/linux/tree/tree_checker_enhance
>
> It's based on v4.18-rc1, with 3 patches already merged into misc-next.
>
> This patchset introduced the following
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 09:04:55AM +0900, Naohiro Aota wrote:
> When btrfs hits error after modifying fs_devices in
> btrfs_init_new_device() (such as btrfs_add_dev_item() returns error), it
> leaves everything as is, but frees allocated btrfs_device. As a result,
> fs_devices->devices and fs_devic
On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 01:34:37PM -0700, Omar Sandoval wrote:
> From: Omar Sandoval
>
> Hi, Dave,
>
> Here's v2 of "btrfs-progs: make all programs and libraries optional",
> this time much less overkill. Now, it's just --disable-programs,
> --disable-shared, and --disable-static. Based on your
On Fri, Jul 06, 2018 at 01:53:24AM +, Gu, Jinxiang wrote:
> > >> Subject: [PATCH 1/4] btrfs-progs: check: Remove the ability to rebuild
> > >> root overwritting existing tree blocks
> > >>
> > >> We have function btrfs_fsck_reinit_root() to reinit csum or extent tree.
> > >
> > > Nit：
> > > or
On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 03:37:27PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> Can be fetched from github:
> https://github.com/adam900710/btrfs-progs/tree/fuzzed_enhance
>
> Some random bugs exposed by the ill-fated fuzz-test (003 never seems to
> pass).
>
> It will be a big work to make fuzz/003 to pass, but at
On 2018年08月03日 00:40, David Sterba wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2018 at 10:37:15AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>> The branch can be fetched from the following git repo:
>> https://github.com/adam900710/linux/tree/tree_checker_enhance
>>
>> It's based on v4.18-rc1, with 3 patches already merged into misc-
Hi Al,
On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 01:43:48AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 10:51:57PM +, Mark Fasheh wrote:
> > Hi Al,
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 11:16:05PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 02:10:43PM -0700, Mark Fasheh wrote:
> > > > ->getattr from insi
When qgroup is on, subvolume deletion does not remove qgroup items
of the subvolume (qgroup info, limits, relation) from quota tree and
they need to get removed manually by "btrfs qgroup destroy".
Since level 0 qgroup cannot be used/inherited by any other subvolume,
let's remove them automatically
On 2018年08月03日 12:08, Misono Tomohiro wrote:
> When qgroup is on, subvolume deletion does not remove qgroup items
> of the subvolume (qgroup info, limits, relation) from quota tree and
> they need to get removed manually by "btrfs qgroup destroy".
>
> Since level 0 qgroup cannot be used/inherite
On Fri, Aug 03, 2018 at 12:17:26PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>
>
>On 2018年08月03日 12:08, Misono Tomohiro wrote:
>> When qgroup is on, subvolume deletion does not remove qgroup items
>> of the subvolume (qgroup info, limits, relation) from quota tree and
>> they need to get removed manually by "btrfs q
On 2018/08/03 13:23, Lu Fengqi wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 03, 2018 at 12:17:26PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2018年08月03日 12:08, Misono Tomohiro wrote:
>>> When qgroup is on, subvolume deletion does not remove qgroup items
>>> of the subvolume (qgroup info, limits, relation) from quota tree and
>>
Question 1: The command has been running for a couple days on a 10TB array
with no visible change in output. Is it actually fixing anything?
enabling repair mode
Checking filesystem on
/dev/disk/by-uuid/e1ee5980-c54b-4b6e-82e2-3dbdcee1dd24
UUID: e1ee5980-c54b-4b6e-82e2-3dbdcee1dd24
checking extent
On 2018年08月03日 12:55, Nathan Dehnel wrote:
> Question 1: The command has been running for a couple days on a 10TB
> array with no visible change in output. Is it actually fixing anything?
>
> enabling repair mode
> Checking filesystem on
> /dev/disk/by-uuid/e1ee5980-c54b-4b6e-82e2-3dbdcee1dd24
>
[BUG]
An infinite loop can be triggered during fuzz/003:
--
== RUN MAYFAIL /home/adam/btrfs/btrfs-progs/btrfs check --repair
/home/adam/btrfs/btrfs-progs/tests//fuzz-tests/images/bko-199833-reloc-recovery-crash.raw.restored
[1/7] checking root items
Fixed 0 roots.
[2/7] checking extents
ct
[BUG]
During fuzz/007 we hit the following error:
--
== RUN MAYFAIL /home/adam/btrfs/btrfs-progs/btrfs rescue super-recover -y
-v
/home/adam/btrfs/btrfs-progs/tests//fuzz-tests/images/bko-200409.raw.restored.scratch
ERROR: tree_root block unaligned: 33554431
ERROR: superblock checksum mat
Another BUG_ON() during fuzz/003:
--
== RUN MAYFAIL /home/adam/btrfs/btrfs-progs/btrfs check --repair
/home/adam/btrfs/btrfs-progs/tests//fuzz-tests/images/bko-199833-reloc-recovery-crash.raw.restored
[1/7] checking root items
Fixed 0 roots.
[2/7] checking extents
ctree.c:1650: leaf_space_
Another BUG_ON() during fuzz/003:
--
== RUN MAYFAIL /home/adam/btrfs/btrfs-progs/btrfs check --init-csum-tree
/home/adam/btrfs/btrfs-progs/tests//fuzz-tests/images/bko-161821.raw.restored
[1/7] checking root items
Fixed 0 roots.
[2/7] checking extents
parent transid verify failed on 419840
When running test fuzz/003, we could hit the following BUG_ON:
--
== RUN MAYFAIL /home/adam/btrfs/btrfs-progs/btrfs check --init-csum-tree
/home/adam/btrfs/btrfs-progs/tests//fuzz-tests/images/bko-155621-bad-block-group-offset.raw.restored
Unable to find block group for 0
Unable to find bl
This can be fetched from github:
https://github.com/adam900710/btrfs-progs/tree/fixes_for_fuzz_test
The base HEAD is:
commit d7a1b84756157d544a9ddc399ef48c6132eaafcf (david/devel)
Author: Qu Wenruo
Date: Thu Jul 5 15:37:31 2018 +0800
btrfs-progs: check/original: Don't overwrite return valu
Another BUG_ON() during fuzz/003:
--
== RUN MAYFAIL /home/adam/btrfs/btrfs-progs/btrfs check --init-csum-tree
/home/adam/btrfs/btrfs-progs/tests//fuzz-tests/images/bko-161821.raw.restored
[1/7] checking root items
Fixed 0 roots.
[2/7] checking extents
parent transid verify failed on 419840
When qgroup is on, subvolume deletion does not remove qgroup item
of the subvolume (qgroup info, limits, relation) from quota tree and
they needs to get removed manually by "btrfs qgroup destroy".
Since level 0 qgroup cannot be used/inherited by any other subvolume,
let's remove them automatically
On 07/31/2018 07:47 PM, Filipe Manana wrote:
On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 11:12 AM, Anand Jain wrote:
On 07/27/2018 08:04 AM, Naohiro Aota wrote:
When btrfs hits error after modifying fs_devices in
btrfs_init_new_device() (such as btrfs_add_dev_item() returns error), it
leaves everything as
Since commit a79a464d5675 ("btrfs: Allow rmdir(2) to delete an empty
subvolume"), rm -r can delete a subvolume too.
This test assumes that rm -r does not delete a subvolume.
Currently the commit does not affect the test since qgroup items
still exist after subvolume deletion, but we plan to change
53 matches
Mail list logo
