Hi Alex,
On Thu, January 24, 2013 at 19:06 (+0100), Alex Lyakas wrote:
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 7:13 PM, Jan Schmidt list.bt...@jan-o-sch.net wrote:
We don't transfer the metadata itself and that's for good reason. The data
should look alike from a user's point of view where possible. In places
To improve the code reuse its better to have btrfs_list_subvols
just return list of subvols witout printing
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
btrfs-list.c | 28 ++--
btrfs-list.h | 2 +-
cmds-subvolume.c | 4 ++--
3 files changed, 21
Here is the V2 of this patch-set, kindly review and accept.
v1-v2:
. 2nd attempt to Rebase to
git://repo.or.cz/btrfs-progs-unstable/devel.git for-chris
and
. Accepts Eric's review comments.
Thanks
Anand Jain (10):
Btrfs-progs: move open_file_or_dir() to utils.c
Btrfs-progs: move
The definition of the function open_file_or_dir() is moved from common.c
to utils.c in order to be able to share some common code between scrub
and the device stats in the following step. That common code uses
open_file_or_dir(). Since open_file_or_dir() makes use of the function
dirfd(3), the
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
btrfs-list.c | 34 --
btrfs-list.h | 1 +
cmds-subvolume.c | 6 +-
3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/btrfs-list.c b/btrfs-list.c
index b404e1d..13a365d 100644
---
We need a function which can get the root_info of a given
subvol. This is in preparation to add support for the show
sub-cli.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
btrfs-list.c | 38 ++
btrfs-list.h | 1 +
2 files changed, 39 insertions(+)
diff
A useful function need to define it in a header file.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
commands.h | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/commands.h b/commands.h
index 8114a73..9b77f3e 100644
--- a/commands.h
+++ b/commands.h
@@ -103,3 +103,6 @@ int
Currently you can print subvol in a list or table format.
This patch will provide a way to extend this to other formats
like the upcoming raw format.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
btrfs-list.c | 26 +++---
btrfs-list.h | 3 +++
cmds-subvolume.c
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
btrfs-list.c | 6 ++
btrfs-list.h | 1 +
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff --git a/btrfs-list.c b/btrfs-list.c
index 0ee13b6..9c84ecb 100644
--- a/btrfs-list.c
+++ b/btrfs-list.c
@@ -1142,6 +1142,11 @@ static int
As we would add more ways to list and manage the subvols
and snapshots, its better if we have struct root_info
defined in the header file.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
btrfs-list.c | 47 ---
btrfs-list.h | 47
get_subvol_name can be used other than the just with in cmds-send.c
so this patch will make it possible with out changing the original
intentions.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
cmds-send.c | 12 ++--
commands.h | 1 +
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 6
On 01/24/2013 12:49 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
On 1/23/13 2:12 AM, Anand Jain wrote:
We need a function which can get the root_info of a given
subvol. This is in preparation to add support for the show
sub-cli.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
btrfs-list.c | 38
This adds show sub-command to the btrfs subvol cli
to display detailed inforamtion of the given subvol
or snapshot.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
btrfs-list.c | 25 +++-
btrfs-list.h | 3 +-
cmds-subvolume.c | 172
Cool, I had this on my stack too. But can you maybe remove the
nonsensical return values, and instead of renaming keeping the btrfsctl.c
copy, why not just use a common copy in utils.c? It'd just be 2 checks
for fd 0 in the btrfsctl callers.
Thanks for the comments Eric. Though I agree,
OK, in spite of saying that these patches did not apply clean, it was
not terribly difficult to refit what did not apply. I did this in two
steps:
1. I created the equivalent of the for-chris branch. This did not apply
clean which surprised me.
Yes I see it. Not sure where I went wrong,
Eric. All accepted. Thanks for the review.
Anand
On 01/24/2013 01:06 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
On 1/23/13 2:12 AM, Anand Jain wrote:
This adds show sub-command to the btrfs subvol cli
to display detailed inforamtion of the given subvol
or snapshot.
Couple things below.
Signed-off-by:
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
btrfs-list.c | 34 --
btrfs-list.h | 1 +
cmds-subvolume.c | 6 +-
3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/btrfs-list.c b/btrfs-list.c
index b404e1d..13a365d 100644
---
Here is the V2 of this patch-set, kindly review and accept.
v1-v2:
. 2nd attempt to Rebase to
git://repo.or.cz/btrfs-progs-unstable/devel.git for-chris
and
. Accepts Eric's review comments.
Thanks
Anand Jain (10):
Btrfs-progs: move open_file_or_dir() to utils.c
Btrfs-progs: move
The definition of the function open_file_or_dir() is moved from common.c
to utils.c in order to be able to share some common code between scrub
and the device stats in the following step. That common code uses
open_file_or_dir(). Since open_file_or_dir() makes use of the function
dirfd(3), the
To improve the code reuse its better to have btrfs_list_subvols
just return list of subvols witout printing
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
btrfs-list.c | 28 ++--
btrfs-list.h | 2 +-
cmds-subvolume.c | 4 ++--
3 files changed, 21
As we would add more ways to list and manage the subvols
and snapshots, its better if we have struct root_info
defined in the header file.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
btrfs-list.c | 47 ---
btrfs-list.h | 47
We need a function which can get the root_info of a given
subvol. This is in preparation to add support for the show
sub-cli.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
btrfs-list.c | 38 ++
btrfs-list.h | 1 +
2 files changed, 39 insertions(+)
diff
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
btrfs-list.c | 6 ++
btrfs-list.h | 1 +
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff --git a/btrfs-list.c b/btrfs-list.c
index 0ee13b6..9c84ecb 100644
--- a/btrfs-list.c
+++ b/btrfs-list.c
@@ -1142,6 +1142,11 @@ static int
A useful function need to define it in a header file.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
commands.h | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/commands.h b/commands.h
index 8114a73..9b77f3e 100644
--- a/commands.h
+++ b/commands.h
@@ -103,3 +103,6 @@ int
Currently you can print subvol in a list or table format.
This patch will provide a way to extend this to other formats
like the upcoming raw format.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
btrfs-list.c | 26 +++---
btrfs-list.h | 3 +++
cmds-subvolume.c
This adds show sub-command to the btrfs subvol cli
to display detailed inforamtion of the given subvol
or snapshot.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
btrfs-list.c | 25 +++-
btrfs-list.h | 3 +-
cmds-subvolume.c | 172
get_subvol_name can be used other than the just with in cmds-send.c
so this patch will make it possible with out changing the original
intentions.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
cmds-send.c | 12 ++--
commands.h | 1 +
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 6
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 17:30:39 +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
This adds show sub-command to the btrfs subvol cli
to display detailed inforamtion of the given subvol
or snapshot.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
btrfs-list.c | 25 +++-
btrfs-list.h | 3 +-
This patch hits a lot of files but adds little code. It
could be considered a bugfix, Currently, when one of the
btrfs user-space programs is executed by a regular user,
the result if oftem a number of strange error messages
which do not indicate the real problem. This patch changes
that
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 06:32:30 -0500, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
This patch hits a lot of files but adds little code. It
could be considered a bugfix, Currently, when one of the
btrfs user-space programs is executed by a regular user,
the result if oftem a number of strange error messages
which
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 06:32:30 -0500
Gene Czarcinski g...@czarc.net wrote:
This patch hits a lot of files but adds little code. It
could be considered a bugfix, Currently, when one of the
btrfs user-space programs is executed by a regular user,
the result if oftem a number of strange error
On 06/08/2012 02:00 PM, Stefan Behrens wrote:
Remove btrfsctl, btrfs-show and btrfs-vol from all target of Makefile.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Behrens sbehr...@giantdisaster.de
---
Makefile |2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
index
On 01/25/2013 06:41 AM, Stefan Behrens wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 06:32:30 -0500, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
This patch hits a lot of files but adds little code. It
could be considered a bugfix, Currently, when one of the
btrfs user-space programs is executed by a regular user,
the result if
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 07:03:19 -0500, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
On 01/25/2013 06:41 AM, Stefan Behrens wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 06:32:30 -0500, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
This patch hits a lot of files but adds little code. It
could be considered a bugfix, Currently, when one of the
btrfs
On 01/25/2013 06:55 AM, Roman Mamedov wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 06:32:30 -0500
Gene Czarcinski g...@czarc.net wrote:
This patch hits a lot of files but adds little code. It
could be considered a bugfix, Currently, when one of the
btrfs user-space programs is executed by a regular user,
the
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 07:29:44AM -0500, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
On 01/25/2013 06:55 AM, Roman Mamedov wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 06:32:30 -0500
Gene Czarcinski g...@czarc.net wrote:
This patch hits a lot of files but adds little code. It
could be considered a bugfix, Currently, when one
On 01/24/2013 06:32 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
A quieter build makes warnings more obvious.
This could probably be improved, but just to see
if people like this or if they hate it. :)
make V=1 overrides it and gets you the full
glory again.
# make
[CC] ctree.o
[CC] disk-io.o
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 07:29:44 -0500
Gene Czarcinski g...@czarc.net wrote:
After all, I do not need to be root to execute btrfs --version.
Is that all that comes to mind? I just did
$ dd if=/dev/zero of=fs.img bs=1M count=2048
2048+0 records in
2048+0 records out
2147483648 bytes (2.1 GB)
On 01/25/2013 07:17 AM, Stefan Behrens wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 07:03:19 -0500, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
On 01/25/2013 06:41 AM, Stefan Behrens wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 06:32:30 -0500, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
This patch hits a lot of files but adds little code. It
could be considered a
.20130121-23h45.snap
ID 430 gen 5034 top level 5 path FS_TREE/__snapshot/__active_var.20130121-23h45.snap
ID 431 gen 5034 top level 5 path FS_TREE/__snapshot/__active_usr.20130121-23h45.snap
ID 550 gen 5043 top level 5 path FS_TREE/__snapshot/__active_home.20130125-13h38.snap
ID 552 gen 5034 top level 5
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013, Roman Mamedov r...@romanrm.ru wrote:
The user does not have to be root, they can be a member of the group disk
to manage this device.
Also some or all of the tools accept not just a block device, but also a
regular file as their parameter.
Wouldn't it be better to
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 6:52 PM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 10:05:04AM -0600, Mitch Harder wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:51 AM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 11:41:19AM -0600, Mitch Harder wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 8:42 AM,
OK, I think I have gotten the message that this is a bad idea as
implemented and that it should be dropped as such. I believe that there
are some things (btrfs fi show comes to mind) which will need root and
I am going to explore doing something for that case. And it also might
be reasonable
On 1/25/13 5:32 AM, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
This patch hits a lot of files but adds little code. It
could be considered a bugfix, Currently, when one of the
btrfs user-space programs is executed by a regular user,
the result if oftem a number of strange error messages
which do not indicate
On 01/25/2013 10:04 AM, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
OK, I think I have gotten the message that this is a bad idea as
implemented and that it should be dropped as such. I believe that
there are some things (btrfs fi show comes to mind) which will need
root and I am going to explore doing something
On 25/01/13 14:43, Hugo Mills wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 07:29:44AM -0500, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
On 01/25/2013 06:55 AM, Roman Mamedov wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 06:32:30 -0500
Gene Czarcinski g...@czarc.net wrote:
This patch hits a lot of files but adds little code. It
could be
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 9:04 AM, Gene Czarcinski g...@czarc.net wrote:
OK, I think I have gotten the message that this is a bad idea as implemented
and that it should be dropped as such. I believe that there are some things
(btrfs fi show comes to mind) which will need root and I am going to
On 1/25/13 5:57 AM, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
On 06/08/2012 02:00 PM, Stefan Behrens wrote:
Remove btrfsctl, btrfs-show and btrfs-vol from all target of Makefile.
TBH, unless there are objections, I'd rather remove the source files as well.
Having unbuilt source code lying around is potentially
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 08:55:58 -0600, Mitch Harder wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 6:52 PM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 10:05:04AM -0600, Mitch Harder wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:51 AM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 11:41:19AM
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 08:55:58AM -0600, Mitch Harder wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 6:52 PM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 10:05:04AM -0600, Mitch Harder wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:51 AM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 09:32:01 -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
On 1/25/13 5:57 AM, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
On 06/08/2012 02:00 PM, Stefan Behrens wrote:
Remove btrfsctl, btrfs-show and btrfs-vol from all target of Makefile.
TBH, unless there are objections, I'd rather remove the source files as
On 1/24/13 1:42 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
On 1/24/13 11:57 AM, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
On 01/24/2013 10:23 AM, Stefan Behrens wrote:
On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 22:39:29 -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
instead of renaming keeping the btrfsctl.c copy
There is a new momentum to improve the Btrfs-progs
It looks to me like the logic in these two if statements are
overlapping.
The test for flags BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_SYSTEM in the 2nd case
should never get triggered, because it would have triggered
on the first case, right?
And since the actions are identical in both cases, this can be
collapsed
On 1/25/13 9:04 AM, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
OK, I think I have gotten the message that this is a bad idea as
implemented and that it should be dropped as such. I believe that
there are some things (btrfs fi show comes to mind) which will need
root and I am going to explore doing something for
On 1/24/13 4:09 PM, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
On 01/24/2013 08:42 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
On 1/24/13 11:57 AM, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
On 01/24/2013 10:23 AM, Stefan Behrens wrote:
On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 22:39:29 -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
instead of renaming keeping the btrfsctl.c copy
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 10:14:06AM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
On 1/24/13 4:09 PM, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
On 01/24/2013 08:42 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
On 1/24/13 11:57 AM, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
On 01/24/2013 10:23 AM, Stefan Behrens wrote:
On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 22:39:29 -0600, Eric
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 08:55:58AM -0600, Mitch Harder wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 6:52 PM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 10:05:04AM -0600, Mitch Harder wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:51 AM,
On 01/25/2013 11:48 AM, Hugo Mills wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 10:14:06AM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
On 1/24/13 4:09 PM, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
On 01/24/2013 08:42 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
On 1/24/13 11:57 AM, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
On 01/24/2013 10:23 AM, Stefan Behrens wrote:
On
I tried creating a multi-device btrfs filesystem for the first time (on
Fedora 18 with 3.7.2-204.fc18.x86_64), and I ran into some problems. I
had heard that btrfs is now reasonably stable, and though I expected to
possibly see a problem here or there, I was a little surprised at just
how many
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 01:05:14PM -0700, Andrew McNabb wrote:
I tried creating a multi-device btrfs filesystem for the first time (on
Fedora 18 with 3.7.2-204.fc18.x86_64), and I ran into some problems. I
had heard that btrfs is now reasonably stable, and though I expected to
possibly see a
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 01:05:14PM -0700, Andrew McNabb wrote:
I tried creating a multi-device btrfs filesystem for the first time (on
Fedora 18 with 3.7.2-204.fc18.x86_64), and I ran into some problems. I
had heard that btrfs is now reasonably stable, and though I expected to
possibly see a
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 03:37:17PM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=903794
This one is just a allocator warning because the relocator doesn't do the
right
accounting for relocation. It's just complainig, we need to fix it but it
won't
keep it from
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 03:53:22PM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
Actually for this one, how did you remove the disk? Did you just yank it out
while the box was running? Did you mount -o degraded and then delete the
device
and then remove it? How exactly did you get to this situation.
Hi,
Could someone do a sanity check of this, i have removed some of the
checking code that is no longer needed but i would prefer to have
reviewers. I haven't looked much at the code, mainly been focusing on
the grunt work ;)
Anyway, thanks for looking at it!
From
Hi,
This is something i have been hacking in several times when i have had
odd issues or had to use a special version of btrfs-progs to handle
issues.
Anyway, thought i'd send something generic enough for everyone =).
From 42f4bae2d2e8ee4a46a36454f7d9e3c63a6284d2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 4:55 PM, Ian Kumlien po...@vapor.com wrote:
Hi,
Could someone do a sanity check of this, i have removed some of the
checking code that is no longer needed but i would prefer to have
reviewers. I haven't looked much at the code, mainly been focusing on
the grunt work
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 05:55:16PM -0600, cwillu wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 4:55 PM, Ian Kumlien po...@vapor.com wrote:
Hi,
Could someone do a sanity check of this, i have removed some of the
checking code that is no longer needed but i would prefer to have
reviewers. I haven't
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 01:02:21AM +0100, Ian Kumlien wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 05:55:16PM -0600, cwillu wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 4:55 PM, Ian Kumlien po...@vapor.com wrote:
Hi,
Could someone do a sanity check of this, i have removed some of the
checking code that is no
Sometimes, when you least expect it, a static binary is what you need to
rescue your data... Or just get a good enough handle on things to make
it work again ;)
make static is a gift to you, dear user with filesystem problems!
---
Makefile | 4
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git
Sorry about that, selecting a range in git send-email isn't really ovious the
first time you try to select a change in the middle of a log.
--
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
declare btrfs_calloc|malloc|strdup|strndup, verify the memory
and abort() if allocation fails.
Please verify, there is a small glitch about strndup being redefined
during compilation - haven't had time to figure out why this happened.
Another issue is that there seems to be a malloc failure
And this adds the static compile target... *phew*
--
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 http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Sometimes, when you least expect it, a static binary is what you need to
rescue your data... Or just get a good enough handle on things to make
it work again ;)
make static is a gift to you, dear user with filesystem problems!
---
Makefile | 4
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git
Hi,
here goes another set of fixes, a mix of old patches and some of them
sent during last week. Part of it was included in the previous
integration branch and thus has the ssd detection, device-ready
support and superblock dump tool.
There are lots of small fixes or cleanups and help string
On Sat, 26 Jan 2013, Gene Czarcinski g...@czarc.net wrote:
OK, I think I have gotten the message that this is a bad idea as
implemented and that it should be dropped as such. I believe that there
are some things (btrfs fi show comes to mind) which will need root and
I am going to explore
On 01/26/2013 03:18 AM, Russell Coker wrote:
On Sat, 26 Jan 2013, Gene Czarcinskig...@czarc.net wrote:
OK, I think I have gotten the message that this is a bad idea as
implemented and that it should be dropped as such. I believe that there
are some things (btrfs fi show comes to mind) which
76 matches
Mail list logo
