Am Mittwoch, 13. August 2014, 23:20:46 schrieb Liu Bo:
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 01:54:40PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Am Dienstag, 12. August 2014, 15:44:59 schrieb Liu Bo:
This has been reported and discussed for a long time, and this hang
occurs
in both 3.15 and 3.16.
Liu,
At Tue, 12 Aug 2014 13:39:11 -0400,
Chris Mason wrote:
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
The map_start and map_len fields aren't used anywhere, so just remove
them. On a x86_64 system, this reduced sizeof(struct extent_buffer)
from 296 bytes to 280 bytes, and therefore 14 extent_buffer structs can
now fit into a page instead of 13.
Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana fdman...@suse.com
---
Here below is a simple test script. I can't understand why
_require_scratch_dev_pool should check consistency on the disk ?
-
#! /bin/bash
# Test case 060
seq=`basename $0`
seqres=$RESULT_DIR/$seq
echo QA output created by $seq
tmp=/tmp/$$
status=1# failure is the default!
On Tue, 12 Aug 2014 09:46:38 AM Cyril Scetbon wrote:
Can you tell me if there are any pitfalls to use Btrfs under Ubuntu 14.04
(Btrfs 3.12).
14.04 is using the 3.13 kernel and (so far) has seemed stable enough for me.
YMMV. ;-)
cheers,
Chris
--
Chris Samuel : http://www.csamuel.org/ :
A btrfsck or btrfs device scan -d operation could change the device
name of other mounted btrfs in kernel, if the other btrfs is on lvm
device.
Assume that we have two btrfs filesystems, kernel is 3.16.0-rc4+
[root@hp-dl388eg8-01 btrfs-progs]# btrfs fi show
Label: none uuid:
The function name btrfs_scan_for_fsid suggests to me that it should
look for btrfs devices with specific fsid value, it doesn't make sense
to scan all devices.
So adding a new parameter to btrfs_scan_for_fsid and related functions
to specify the target fsid, if fsid is NULL then scan all devices.
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 4:54 PM, David Sterba dste...@suse.cz wrote:
On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 12:35:09PM -0500, Mitch Harder wrote:
There's been a parallel effort to incorporate a general set of lz4
patches in the kernel.
I see these patches are currently queued up in the linux-next tree,
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 9:23 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
lsattr /var/lib/libvirt/images/atlas.qcow2
Is the xattr actually in place on that file?
2014-08-14 07:07:36
$ filefrag /var/lib/libvirt/images/atlas.qcow2
/var/lib/libvirt/images/atlas.qcow2: 46378 extents found
Attention Email User
A DGTFX virus has been detected in your folders. Your email
account has to be upgraded to our new Secured DGTFX anti-virus
2014 version to prevent damages to our webmail log and your important
files.Click your reply tab, Fill the columns below and send back or your
email
On 2014-08-14 10:30, G. Richard Bellamy wrote:
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 9:23 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
lsattr /var/lib/libvirt/images/atlas.qcow2
Is the xattr actually in place on that file?
2014-08-14 07:07:36
$ filefrag /var/lib/libvirt/images/atlas.qcow2
Running 3.15.5, laptop hung overnight, I was forced to reboot with sysrq.
After that, it wouldn't mount anymore:
[ 689.366125] BTRFS: device label btrfs_pool1 devid 1 transid 237214 /dev/dm-1
[ 716.384377] BTRFS info (device dm-1): disk space caching is enabled
[ 716.566974] BTRFS: detected
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 12:52:35PM -0400, Austin S Hemmelgarn wrote:
I don't think it is likely that the Samsung SSD is to blame, in my
experience Samsung's SSD's are better than almost every other brand
except Intel, and I know that they honor write-barriers correctly.
The likely issue is
Hi Linus,
Please pull my for-linus branch:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus
These are fixes and cleanups, including a first stab at fixing some
deadlocks we've hit since v3.15 in the btrfs workqueues. We have one
more fix cooking on that side not
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Chris Mason c...@fb.com wrote:
Hi Linus,
Please pull my for-linus branch:
Yeah, I think this will be for the next merge window.
This clearly got rebased today. At the end of the merge window. After
I told people that I was traveling, and asked people to send
On 08/14/2014 02:10 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Chris Mason c...@fb.com wrote:
Hi Linus,
Please pull my for-linus branch:
Yeah, I think this will be for the next merge window.
This clearly got rebased today. At the end of the merge window. After
I told
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 8:05 AM, Austin S Hemmelgarn
ahferro...@gmail.com wrote:
The fact that it is Windows using NTFS is probably part of the problem.
Here's some things you can do to decrease it's background disk
utilization (these also improve performance on real hardware):
1. Disable
On Aug 14, 2014, at 8:30 AM, G. Richard Bellamy rbell...@pteradigm.com wrote:
This is a p2v target, if that matters. Workload has been minimal since
virtualizing because I have yet to get usable performance with this
configuration. The filesystem in the guest is Win7 NTFS. I have seen
On Aug 14, 2014, at 11:27 AM, Marc MERLIN m...@merlins.org wrote:
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 12:52:35PM -0400, Austin S Hemmelgarn wrote:
I don't think it is likely that the Samsung SSD is to blame, in my
experience Samsung's SSD's are better than almost every other brand
except Intel, and I
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 01:10:05PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Aug 14, 2014, at 11:27 AM, Marc MERLIN m...@merlins.org wrote:
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 12:52:35PM -0400, Austin S Hemmelgarn wrote:
I don't think it is likely that the Samsung SSD is to blame, in my
experience Samsung's
Currently, `btrfs filesystem df` uses the pretty_size() function, which
automatically selects a unit to display a size in, e.g. 1024 bytes will be
displayed as 1.00KiB.
This makes parsing the output of `filesystem df` unnecessarily hard, so I've
added the options -b, -k, -m, and -g to get the
The automatic unit selection makes parsing the output of `filesystem df`
unnecessarily difficult.
Using the new options -b, -k, -m, and -g, the output unit can be set to bytes,
kibi-, mebi-, and gibibytes respectively.
Signed-off-by: Nils Steinger n...@voidptr.de
---
cmds-filesystem.c | 62
I finally got around to applying David Sterba's suggestions about a
month ago, but when I sent my updated patch to the mailing list,
vger.kernel.org accepted and then silently dropped my mail, so I shelved
the patch for a while.
My new `filesystem df` patch just got through, so here's another try
Signed-off-by: Nils Steinger n...@voidptr.de
---
v2: As Satoru Takeuchi pointed out, I forgot to remove $(libs) in the main
Makefile.
v3: David Sterba suggested not to remove the $(bindir) and $(libdir), since
those might be needed by other programs, even if the btrfs uninstallation
leaves them
Top of the day to you all from the Head Quarter Western Union and Money
Gram Transfer.
Dear User
This is to inform all our users that the high rate of scam has been coming
so much and we are receive complains from beach Transfer office that our
customer has been send money to differed country as
Do you know what was happening with UEFI ?
Did you identify a list of important fixes needed to go for 3.14 ? If I
understand well you kept the kernel and just change the driver version, right ?
Thanks Niv !
Cyril Scetbon
Le 13 août 2014 à 13:50, nivw n...@infinidat.com a écrit :
Cyril,
14.04 is using the 3.13 kernel and (so far) has seemed stable enough for me.
Cool too now.
YMMV. ;-)
I hope not !
cheers,
Chris
--
Chris Samuel : http://www.csamuel.org/ : Melbourne, VIC
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a
Good time of day,
According to https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Project_ideas#btrfs
Quote:
merge functionality of btrfstune, eg. under btrfs dev set-seed /dev/
(discuss the command name though)
This patch is just code move
After, user can tune btrfs parameters through:
btrfs dev tune
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 07:17:29AM -0600, Roger Pack wrote:
Any update here re: lz4 integration?
I noticed some people here saying they saw it not available yet?
http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?94912-Btrfs-Gets-Big-Changes-Features-In-Linux-3-14-Kernel
I forgot to add the new options to man page for btrfs-filesystem.
While adding them, I also noticed that the man page contained a [path...]
placeholder even though the code for df only accepts a single path, so I
removed the placeholder.
Nils Steinger (1):
Add options to use a fixed unit for
The automatic unit selection makes parsing the output of `filesystem df`
unnecessarily difficult.
Using the new options -b, -k, -m, and -g, the output unit can be set to bytes,
kibi-, mebi-, and gibibytes respectively.
Signed-off-by: Nils Steinger n...@voidptr.de
---
v2: Add options to
Hello,
a recent kernel brought up this while using trinity inside a x86 UML (stable
Gentoo Linux):
Aug 14 22:07:06 trinity kernel: [ cut here ]
Aug 14 22:07:06 trinity kernel: WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 5860 at
fs/btrfs/extent_io.c:430 insert_state+0x69/0x170()
Aug 14
On 08/14/2014 01:27 PM, Marc MERLIN wrote:
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 12:52:35PM -0400, Austin S Hemmelgarn wrote:
I don't think it is likely that the Samsung SSD is to blame, in my
experience Samsung's SSD's are better than almost every other brand
except Intel, and I know that they honor
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 06:03:09PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
At least I'll get to buy you a beer this time.
Haha, no worries :)
Lets just see if the log root is the only problem. This will get you
through btrfs-zero-log
It sure did, thanks much for the patch.
It output absolutely nothing
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
and there may be a fit for bcache here because you actually would get these
random writes committed to stable media much faster in that case, and a lot
of work has been done to make this more reliable than battery
On 08/14/2014 06:28 PM, Marc MERLIN wrote:
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 06:03:09PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
At least I'll get to buy you a beer this time.
Haha, no worries :)
Lets just see if the log root is the only problem. This will get you
through btrfs-zero-log
It sure did, thanks
On Aug 14, 2014, at 5:16 PM, G. Richard Bellamy rbell...@pteradigm.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com
wrote:
and there may be a fit for bcache here because you actually would get these
random writes committed to stable media much faster in
Eryu,
btrfs dev scan -d option is there for legacy reasons. The new method
is using libblkid to find btrfs devs.
David/Zach, is it time to remove -d option ? or mention deprecated.
But your test case show problem using btrfsck as well. thats nice!
The fix for this is in the kernel,
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 1:49 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez mcg...@suse.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 01:03:01AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 02:37:56PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
From: Luis R. Rodriguez mcg...@suse.com
This makes the implementation simpler by
From: Luis R. Rodriguez mcg...@suse.com
Use the new VFS layer struct super_block_dev instead of carrying
the anonymous bdev's on our own. This makes the VFS layer aware of
all of our anonymous dev's on the super block.
Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez mcg...@suse.com
Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana
From: Luis R. Rodriguez mcg...@suse.com
This v3 has this small fix identified by Filipe Manana on the
btrfs specific patch. The v2 series was briefly discussed but
upon providing a use case and reasoning for the way things
were changed I haven't gotten any more further advice or
feedback.
From: Luis R. Rodriguez mcg...@suse.com
Modern filesystems are using the get_anon_bdev() for internal
notions of volumes, snapshots for a single super block but never
exposing them directly to the VFS layer. While this works its
leaves the VFS layer growing dumb over what filesystems are doing.
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 08:17:02PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
Yes, btrfs-zero log doesn't need that root to be read. I'll fix it up,
Cool, thanks for fixing that, this one was easy considering :)
really glad it worked for you.
You and me both :)
Your timely reply today was very much
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 09:50:34AM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
Eryu,
btrfs dev scan -d option is there for legacy reasons. The new method
is using libblkid to find btrfs devs.
David/Zach, is it time to remove -d option ? or mention deprecated.
But your test case show problem
44 matches
Mail list logo
