On Mon, 11 Aug 2014 17:42:56 +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
We are not updating sprout fs seed pointer when all seed device
is replaced. This patch will check if all seed device has been
replaced and then update the sprout pointer accordingly.
Same reproducer as in the previous patch would apply
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014 17:42:54 +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
reproducer:
mount /dev/sdb /btrfs
btrfs dev add /dev/sdc /btrfs
btrfs rep start -B /dev/sdb /dev/sdd /btrfs
umount /btrfs
WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 12661 at fs/btrfs/volumes.c:891
__btrfs_close_devices+0x1b0/0x200 [btrfs]()
::
From: Satoru Takeuchi takeuchi_sat...@jp.fujitsu.com
- Simplify the description of both man and usage.
- Add the description about short options for '--all-devices
and '--mounted', '-d' and '-m' respectively.
- Fix to show -d and -m is not exclusive
with 'path|uuid|device|label'.
-
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014 17:42:55 +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
reproducer:
reproducer:
mount /dev/sdb /btrfs
btrfs dev add /dev/sdc /btrfs
btrfs rep start -B /dev/sdb /dev/sdd /btrfs
umount /btrfs
WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 3882 at fs/btrfs/volumes.c:892
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014 17:42:53 +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
There is no logical change in this patch, just a preparatory patch,
so that changes can be easily reasoned.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 14 +-
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 5
This has been reported and discussed for a long time, and this hang occurs in
both 3.15 and 3.16.
Btrfs now migrates to use kernel workqueue, but it introduces this hang problem.
Btrfs has a kind of work queued as an ordered way, which means that its
ordered_func() must be processed in the way
Oops, I sent a wrong patch. Here is the correct one.
===
From: Satoru Takeuchi takeuchi_sat...@jp.fujitsu.com
- Simplify the description of both man and usage.
- Add the description about short options for '--all-devices'
and '--mounted', '-d' and '-m' respectively.
- Fix to show -d and
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 10:55:51AM +0800, Miao Xie wrote:
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 22:55:44 +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
This part of the trace is relatively new because Liu Bo's patch made us
redirty the pages, making it more likely that we'd try to write them
during commit.
But, at the end of the
On 12/08/2014 15:24, Miao Xie wrote:
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014 17:42:56 +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
We are not updating sprout fs seed pointer when all seed device
is replaced. This patch will check if all seed device has been
replaced and then update the sprout pointer accordingly.
Same reproducer
On 12/08/2014 15:29, Miao Xie wrote:
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014 17:42:55 +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
reproducer:
reproducer:
mount /dev/sdb /btrfs
btrfs dev add /dev/sdc /btrfs
btrfs rep start -B /dev/sdb /dev/sdd /btrfs
umount /btrfs
WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 3882 at
Here is the *really* correct one. I seems to need a break ;-(
===
From: Satoru Takeuchi takeuchi_sat...@jp.fujitsu.com
- Simplify the description of both man and usage.
- Add the description about short options for '--all-devices'
and '--mounted', '-d' and '-m' respectively.
- Fix to show
Hi Daniel,
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 01:14:08PM +0800, Daniel J Blueman wrote:
When running MonetDB over a BTRFS RAID-0 set over 4 SSDs [1] on
3.15.5, we see io_ctl have a bad address of 0x20, causing a fatal
pagefault in memcpy():
(gdb) list *(__btrfs_write_out_cache+0x3e4)
From: Satoru Takeuchi takeuchi_sat...@jp.fujitsu.com
Just fix the following misformatting in 'man btrfs-replace'.
===
-f
Kernel workqueue's tracepoints print the address of work_struct, while btrfs
workqueue's tracepoints print the address of btrfs_work.
We need a connection between this two, for example when debuging, we usually
grep an address in the trace output. So it'd be better to also print
work_struct in
Tracepoint trace_btrfs_normal_work_done never has an user, just cleanup it.
Signed-off-by: Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com
---
include/trace/events/btrfs.h | 7 ---
1 file changed, 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/trace/events/btrfs.h b/include/trace/events/btrfs.h
index bb8fe5a..aa595b1
Hi,
Unlimited extended attributes
https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Project_ideas#Unlimited_extended_attributes
would be a very natural option to backup column-family-based databases
like Rocksdb to a filesystem, up to now only ZFS has support for
unlimited extended attributes.
Is there any
Hi guys,
Can you tell me if there are any pitfalls to use Btrfs under Ubuntu 14.04
(Btrfs 3.12). Are there any well known bug that are only fixed later ? Please,
send me links just to check if it could hurt or not ..
Thanks
--
Cyril SCETBON
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
Hi all,
I'll be offline as summer vacation for several days.
So, until Aug 18, probably I can't send any reply...
Thanks,
Satoru
--
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
On 10/8/2014 10:21 μμ, Vimal A R wrote:
Hello,
I came across the to-do list at
https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Project_ideas and would like to know if
this list is updated and recent.
I am looking for a project idea for my under graduate degree which can be
completed in around 3-4
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 04:15:26AM +, Duncan wrote:
Jose Ildefonso Camargo Tolosa posted on Mon, 11 Aug 2014 16:33:36 -0500 as
excerpted:
As I hate when a thread is left hanging, you deserve to know what
happened in the end, you likely already guessed, but anyway: I nuked the
This has been reported and discussed for a long time, and this hang occurs in
both 3.15 and 3.16.
Btrfs now migrates to use kernel workqueue, but it introduces this hang problem.
Btrfs has a kind of work queued as an ordered way, which means that its
ordered_func() must be processed in the way
On 08/12/2014 03:44 AM, Liu Bo wrote:
This has been reported and discussed for a long time, and this hang occurs in
both 3.15 and 3.16.
Btrfs now migrates to use kernel workqueue, but it introduces this hang
problem.
Btrfs has a kind of work queued as an ordered way, which means that
I not so long install ubuntu 14.04 to my friend and it working good,
but i don't know, devs of distro port fixes from newer kernel to 3.13
or not.
2014-08-12 10:46 GMT+03:00 Cyril Scetbon cyril.scet...@free.fr:
Hi guys,
Can you tell me if there are any pitfalls to use Btrfs under Ubuntu 14.04
On 12/08/14 08:46, Cyril Scetbon wrote:
Hi guys,
Can you tell me if there are any pitfalls to use Btrfs under Ubuntu 14.04
(Btrfs 3.12). Are there any well known bug that are only fixed later ? Please,
send me links just to check if it could hurt or not ..
You should probably install the
Austin S Hemmelgarn ahferro...@gmail.com writes:
Another thing that isn't listed there, that I would personally love to
see is support for secure file deletion.
As discussed in the followups, it is difficult to do a really secure
deletion and a security-conscious person would opt to use
On 11/08/14 03:53, Austin S Hemmelgarn wrote:
Another thing that isn't listed there, that I would personally love to
see is support for secure file deletion. To be truly secure though,
this would need to hook into the COW logic so that files marked for
secure deletion can't be reflinked
On 2014-08-12 11:52, David Pottage wrote:
On 11/08/14 03:53, Austin S Hemmelgarn wrote:
Another thing that isn't listed there, that I would personally love to
see is support for secure file deletion. To be truly secure though,
this would need to hook into the COW logic so that files
On 08/06/2014 11:14 AM, Takashi Iwai wrote:
I meant that I don't care how you do it, if you want to do it the simple way
first and then send the cleanup later thats fine by me. Thanks,
Ah, misunderstood. Then please disregard my v2 patches and take just
v1 patch. It's even good for
Hi Jim,
To any core btrfs devs who are listening and care - the unreliability of
btrfs send/receive is IMO the single biggest roadblock to adoption of btrfs
as a serious next-gen FS.
For you it are send/receive deficiencies, however there are many other
feature/enhancement requests having top
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 02:22:31PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
On 07/17/2014 03:39 PM, Mark Fasheh wrote:
During its tree walk, btrfs_drop_snapshot() will skip any shared
subtrees it encounters. This is incorrect when we have qgroups
turned on as those subtrees need to have their contents
On 07/17/2014 03:39 PM, Mark Fasheh wrote:
During its tree walk, btrfs_drop_snapshot() will skip any shared
subtrees it encounters. This is incorrect when we have qgroups
turned on as those subtrees need to have their contents
accounted. In particular, the case we're concerned with is when
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 02:36:17PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
On 08/12/2014 02:32 PM, Mark Fasheh wrote:
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 02:22:31PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
On 07/17/2014 03:39 PM, Mark Fasheh wrote:
During its tree walk, btrfs_drop_snapshot() will skip any shared
subtrees
On 08/12/2014 03:01 PM, Mark Fasheh wrote:
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 02:36:17PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
On 08/12/2014 02:32 PM, Mark Fasheh wrote:
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 02:22:31PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
On 07/17/2014 03:39 PM, Mark Fasheh wrote:
During its tree walk,
Hi everyone,
I've pushed out a rebased integration tree with our patches so far. I'm
starting more tests now against Linus and linux-next.
-chris
--
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
When using send/receive, it it useful to be able to match up source
subvols on the send side (as, say, for -p or -c clone sources) with their
corresponding copies on the receive side. This patch adds a -R option to
btrfs sub list to show the received subvolume UUID on the receive side,
allowing
below, not bellow
Signed-off-by: Hugo Mills h...@carfax.org.uk
---
cmds-subvolume.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/cmds-subvolume.c b/cmds-subvolume.c
index 5216e53..349d0db 100644
--- a/cmds-subvolume.c
+++ b/cmds-subvolume.c
@@ -390,7 +390,7 @@ static const
Even if the size of rootdir given by -r option is larger than the
specified partition, zero_output_file() is still called. It will take
time to fill up the partition with zero if the partition is big, and
end up with an EIO.
The size should be checked before zeroing the partition.
Signed-off-by:
mkfs.btrfs did not force mixed data/metadata groups if the size of
rootdir given by -r option is small.
# mkdir -p /tmp/mydir
# echo aaa /tmp/mydir/myfile
# mkfs.btrfs -f -r /tmp/mydir /dev/sdb1
...
fs created label (null) on /dev/sdb1
nodesize 16384 leafsize 16384 sectorsize 4096
Original Message
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: fix task hang under heavy compressed write
From: Chris Mason c...@fb.com
To: Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com, linux-btrfs linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Date: 2014年08月12日 22:57
On 08/12/2014 03:44 AM, Liu Bo wrote:
This has been reported
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 9:24 AM, Marc MERLIN m...@merlins.org wrote:
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 04:15:26AM +, Duncan wrote:
Jose Ildefonso Camargo Tolosa posted on Mon, 11 Aug 2014 16:33:36 -0500 as
excerpted:
As I hate when a thread is left hanging, you deserve to know what
happened in
I have a BTRFS mirrored raid on three disks: 500 GB, 1000 GB, 1500 GB.
The 1500 GB is going bad.
I bought a 4000 GB and wanted to make a 1500 GB and also a 2500 GB
partition. By mistake I made a 1.5 GB and did not realize it until much
later.
I added the 1.5 GB to my raid and tried removing the
41 matches
Mail list logo
