Hi Alex,
On 2014/03/28 0:50, Alex Lyakas wrote:
Hi Tsutomu Itoh,
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 6:32 AM, Tsutomu Itoh t-i...@jp.fujitsu.com wrote:
We should free leaf and root before returning from the error
handling code.
Signed-off-by: Tsutomu Itoh t-i...@jp.fujitsu.com
---
fs/btrfs/disk-io.c |
For modern filesystems such as btrfs, t/p/e size level operations
are common.
add size unit t/p/e parsing to memparse
Signed-off-by: Gui Hecheng guihc.f...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
lib/cmdline.c | 23 +++
1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/cmdline.c
btrfs resize now support size unit parse of k/m/g/t/p/e in kernel space,
adopt the changes in userspace manpage.
Signed-off-by: Gui Hecheng guihc.f...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
cmds-filesystem.c | 3 ++-
man/btrfs.8.in| 9 +
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git
Originally following cmds will work:
# btrfs fi resize -10A mnt
# btrfs fi resize -10Gaha mnt
Filter the arg by checking the return pointer of memparse.
Signed-off-by: Gui Hecheng guihc.f...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 5 +++--
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2
Steps to reproduce:
# mkfs.btrfs -f /dev/sda[8-11] -m raid5 -d raid5
# mount /dev/sda8 /mnt
# btrfs scrub start -BR /mnt
# echo $? --unverified errors make return value be 3
This is because we don't setup right mapping between physical
and logical address for raid56, which makes checksum
On 31/03/14 12:03, Gui Hecheng wrote:
- * potentially suffixed with %K (for kilobytes, or 1024 bytes),
- * %M (for megabytes, or 1048576 bytes), or %G (for gigabytes, or
- * 1073741824). If the number is suffixed with K, M, or G, then
+ * potentially suffixed with
+ * %K
On 03/24/2014 05:58 AM, Wang Shilong wrote:
To compress a small write(=blocksize) dosen't save us
disk space at all, skip it can save us some compression time.
This patch can also fix wrong setting nocompression flag for
inode, say a case when @total_in is 4096, and then we get
There's no point building the path string in each iteration of the
send_hole loop, as it produces always the same string.
Signed-off-by: Filipe David Borba Manana fdman...@gmail.com
---
fs/btrfs/send.c |6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/send.c
2014-03-31 20:31 GMT+08:00 Chris Mason c...@fb.com:
On 03/24/2014 05:58 AM, Wang Shilong wrote:
To compress a small write(=blocksize) dosen't save us
disk space at all, skip it can save us some compression time.
This patch can also fix wrong setting nocompression flag for
inode, say a
If we don't reschedule use rb_next to find the next extent state
instead of a full tree search, which is more efficient and safe
since we didn't release the io tree's lock.
Signed-off-by: Filipe David Borba Manana fdman...@gmail.com
---
fs/btrfs/extent_io.c |6 +-
1 file changed, 5
2014-03-31 18:34 GMT+08:00 Wang Shilong wangsl.f...@cn.fujitsu.com:
Steps to reproduce:
# mkfs.btrfs -f /dev/sda[8-11] -m raid5 -d raid5
# mount /dev/sda8 /mnt
# btrfs scrub start -BR /mnt
# echo $? --unverified errors make return value be 3
This is because we don't setup right mapping
2014-03-31 20:54 GMT+08:00 Shilong Wang wangshilong1...@gmail.com:
2014-03-31 18:34 GMT+08:00 Wang Shilong wangsl.f...@cn.fujitsu.com:
Steps to reproduce:
# mkfs.btrfs -f /dev/sda[8-11] -m raid5 -d raid5
# mount /dev/sda8 /mnt
# btrfs scrub start -BR /mnt
# echo $? --unverified errors
In a normal scenario when sys-admin replaces a disk, the
expeted is btrfs will release the disk completely.
However the below test case gives a wrong impression that
replaced disk is still is in use.
$ btrfs rep start /dev/sde /dev/sdg4 /btrfs
$ mkfs.btrfs /dev/sde
/dev/sde appears to contain an
From: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
This fix will ensure all SB copies on the disk is zeroed
when the disk is intentionally removed. This helps to
better manage disks in the user land.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
btrfs: don't double brelse on device rm
Device removal
Hi, I probably should have used a better subject title. Also, I submitted this
without knowing if it would be helpful or not. If it can be used in a good way
Great! If not, then no problem. I appreciate you getting back with me, Marc.
Thanks. :)
On 03/30/2014 12:50 AM, Marc MERLIN wrote:
On
On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 05:21:23PM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote:
I had a look at
http://bj0z.wordpress.com/2011/04/27/determining-snapshot-size-in-btrfs/#comment-35
but it's quite old and does not work anymore since userland became
incompatible with it.
Has anyone seen something newer or have a
Hi, I hadn't noticed this post,
I think I know the reason this time : you have used USB you bad guy!
I think USB does not support flush / barrier , which is mandatory for
BTRFS to work correctly in case of power loss.
For most filesystems actually, but the damages suffered by COW
filesystems
Firstly, it should be noted that I can mount and use my Btrfs file
system with nary an error or warning; however, I'm uncomfortable
using it while it's in some kind of inconsistent state.
The `btrfsck' tool is telling me the following:
Errors found in extent allocation tree or chunk allocation
Bob Marley posted on Mon, 31 Mar 2014 19:04:38 +0200 as excerpted:
Hi, I hadn't noticed this post,
I think I know the reason this time : you have used USB you bad guy!
I think USB does not support flush / barrier , which is mandatory for
BTRFS to work correctly in case of power loss.
For
Michael Witten posted on Mon, 31 Mar 2014 17:39:05 + as excerpted:
Firstly, it should be noted that I can mount and use my Btrfs file
system with nary an error or warning; however, I'm uncomfortable using
it while it's in some kind of inconsistent state.
The `btrfsck' tool is telling me
On Mon, 31 Mar 2014 19:45:27 + (UTC), Duncan wrote:
Hopefully, none of those commands included btrfsck --repair
... Woops...
Fortunately, it doesn't seem to have changed anything.
That goes double if you're running raid5/6 mode
For the record, I've essentially just put Btrfs on 1 block
Michael Witten posted on Mon, 31 Mar 2014 20:33:39 + as excerpted:
Just as an aside, I find it odd that the default for such a small system
would be to duplicate user data.
I've wondered at that logical accident too, but the problem was that
data chunks default to a gig in size and
Michael Witten posted on Mon, 31 Mar 2014 20:33:39 + as excerpted:
I apologize if that ASCII art fails to render properly on your end.
FWIW I make a point of configuring monospace fonts as default for
internet message (Mail and news) bodies, precisely so I CAN properly view
ascii-art. So
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:16 PM, Duncan wrote:
FWIW I make a point of configuring monospace fonts as default for
internet message (Mail and news) bodies, precisely so I CAN properly view
ascii-art. So it came thru very nicely here. =:^)
That's good to know; unfortunately, you can never be
On Mon, 2014-03-31 at 13:17 +0200, Brendan Hide wrote:
On 31/03/14 12:03, Gui Hecheng wrote:
- * potentially suffixed with %K (for kilobytes, or 1024 bytes),
- * %M (for megabytes, or 1048576 bytes), or %G (for gigabytes, or
- * 1073741824). If the number is suffixed with K, M, or G, then
25 matches
Mail list logo
