On 12/15/2014 03:49 PM, Robert White wrote:
On 12/14/2014 10:06 PM, Robert White wrote:
On 12/14/2014 05:21 PM, Dongsheng Yang wrote:
Anyone have some suggestion about it?
(... strong advocacy for raw numbers...)
Hi Robert, thanx for your so detailed reply.
You are proposing to report the
On 12/14/2014 11:41 PM, Nick Dimov wrote:
Hi, thanks for the answer, I will answer between the lines.
On 15.12.2014 08:45, Robert White wrote:
On 12/14/2014 08:50 PM, Nick Dimov wrote:
Hello everyone!
First, thanks for amazing work on btrfs filesystem!
Now the problem:
I use a ssd as my
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 3:54 AM, Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
Although btrfsck test case support pure image dump(tar.xz), it is still
too large for some images, e.g, a small 64M image with about 3 levels
(level 0~2) metadata will produce about 2.6M after xz zip, which is too
large
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 3:54 AM, Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
Although btrfsck test case support pure image dump(tar.xz), it is still
too large for some images, e.g, a small 64M image with about 3 levels
(level 0~2) metadata will produce about 2.6M after xz zip, which is too
large
On 12/15/2014 12:26 AM, Dongsheng Yang wrote:
On 12/15/2014 03:49 PM, Robert White wrote:
On 12/14/2014 10:06 PM, Robert White wrote:
On 12/14/2014 05:21 PM, Dongsheng Yang wrote:
Anyone have some suggestion about it?
(... strong advocacy for raw numbers...)
Hi Robert, thanx for your so
Original Message
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] btrfs-progs: Add support for btrfs-image +
corrupt script fsck test case.
From: Filipe David Manana fdman...@gmail.com
To: Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com
Date: 2014年12月15日 17:00
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 3:54 AM, Qu Wenruo
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 9:40 AM, Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
Original Message
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] btrfs-progs: Add support for btrfs-image + corrupt
script fsck test case.
From: Filipe David Manana fdman...@gmail.com
To: Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Filipe David Manana fdman...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 3:54 AM, Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
Although btrfsck test case support pure image dump(tar.xz), it is still
too large for some images, e.g, a small 64M image with about 3 levels
On 2014-12-13 21:59, Ali AlipourR wrote:
Hi,
1- Do setting compression flag per subvolume is implemented?
(I did read on wiki that it is not implemented, but I can set it via
btrfs property)
AFAIK, it's the compression related mount options that don't work
per-subvolume. Using chattr +c or
If we are using skinny metadata, the block's tree level is in the offset
of the key and not in a btrfs_tree_block_info structure following the
extent item (it doesn't exist). Therefore fix it.
Besides returning the correct level in the tree, this also prevents reading
past the leaf's end in the
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 09:36:51AM +, Filipe David Manana wrote:
So another thing I would like to see is doing a more comprehensive
verification that the repair code worked as expected. Currently we
only check that a readonly fsck, after running fsck --repair, returns
0.
For the
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 10:13:45AM +, Filipe David Manana wrote:
So another thing I would like to see is doing a more comprehensive
verification that the repair code worked as expected. Currently we
only check that a readonly fsck, after running fsck --repair, returns
0.
For the
On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 03:23:03PM -0800, Alex Elsayed wrote:
I have not seen any evidence that combining hashes like that actually
reduces the chances of collision, but if we assume it does, then
again, the non-crypto hashes would be faster. For example, 128-bit
Spooky2 combined with
Add -v -q switches to mkfs.btrfs, to control the verbosity of mkfs.btrfs.
Signed-off-by: Goffredo Baroncelli kreij...@inwind.it
---
mkfs.c | 16 ++--
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mkfs.c b/mkfs.c
index e10e62d..26f8041 100644
--- a/mkfs.c
+++ b/mkfs.c
Hi All,
enclosed a patches set to improve the output of mkfs.btrfs command.
Currently I find the output of mkfs.btrfs command quite confusing:
# mkfs.btrfs -f -M -d raid5 -m raid5 /dev/vd[b-k]
Btrfs v3.17
See http://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org for more information.
Turning ON incompat feature
Move the group_profile_str() function from cmds-filesystem.c to utils.c
to be re-used from other modules (in this case from mkfs.c)
Signed-off-by: Goffredo Baroncelli kreij...@inwind.it
---
cmds-filesystem.c | 22 --
utils.c | 22 ++
utils.h
When creating a new btrfs_device, copy the path to track it.
This path is then used by mkfs.btrfs to list all devices.
Signed-off-by: Goffredo Baroncelli kreij...@inwind.it
---
utils.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/utils.c b/utils.c
index dcb4f74..3f50e4d 100644
---
The function make_btrfs() has as argument the fsid of the filesystem.
If this fsid is empty or null make_btrfs() generates a new fsid. However
If the buffer is valid (but the string is empty) the generated fsid is
copied back to the caller.
Signed-off-by: Goffredo Baroncelli kreij...@inwind.it
Add verbose option to btrfs_add_to_fsid() in order to avoid to print
the information to console when not needed.
The same information is print in the summary of the mkfs.btrfs command.
Signed-off-by: Goffredo Baroncelli kreij...@inwind.it
---
utils.c | 7 ---
utils.h | 2 +-
2 files changed,
This patch print the summary of the filesystem after the creation.
The main fileds printed are:
- devices list with their uuid, devid, path and size
- raid profile (dup,single,raid0...)
- leafsize/nodesize/sectorsize
- filesystem features (raid56, extref, mixed-bg)
If the '-v' switched is passed,
Add -v and -o switches to the mkfs.btrfs man page.
Signed-off-by: Goffredo Baroncelli kreij...@inwind.it
---
Documentation/mkfs.btrfs.txt | 9 +
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/mkfs.btrfs.txt b/Documentation/mkfs.btrfs.txt
index ba7e42b..8ecb1a6 100644
---
On 12/12/2014 09:37 AM, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
FYI, still seeing this with 3.18 (scrub passes fine on this filesystem).
# time btrfs balance start /mnt/lxc2
Segmentation fault
real322m32.153s
user0m0.000s
sys 16m0.930s
Sorry Tomasz, you are now at the top of the list. I
On 2014-12-15 21:07, Josef Bacik wrote:
On 12/12/2014 09:37 AM, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
FYI, still seeing this with 3.18 (scrub passes fine on this
filesystem).
# time btrfs balance start /mnt/lxc2
Segmentation fault
real322m32.153s
user0m0.000s
sys 16m0.930s
Sorry Tomasz,
Original Message
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] btrfs-progs: Add support for btrfs-image +
corrupt script fsck test case.
From: David Sterba dste...@suse.cz
To: Filipe David Manana fdman...@gmail.com
Date: 2014年12月16日 01:35
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 09:36:51AM +, Filipe David
Original Message
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] btrfs-progs: Add support for btrfs-image +
corrupt script fsck test case.
From: Filipe David Manana fdman...@gmail.com
To: Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com
Date: 2014年12月15日 17:43
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 9:40 AM, Qu Wenruo
Original Message
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] btrfs-progs: Add support for btrfs-image +
corrupt script fsck test case.
From: David Sterba dste...@suse.cz
To: Filipe David Manana fdman...@gmail.com
Date: 2014年12月16日 02:19
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 10:13:45AM +, Filipe David
Goffredo Baroncelli posted on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 21:02:59 +0100 as
excerpted:
+ printf( Total disks size: %10s\n,
+ pretty_size(total_block_count));
I really like this patch series. Makes mkfs.btrfs much nicer to use. =:^)
I'm not a dev and won't
(2014/12/16 1:04), Filipe Manana wrote:
If we are using skinny metadata, the block's tree level is in the offset
of the key and not in a btrfs_tree_block_info structure following the
extent item (it doesn't exist). Therefore fix it.
Yes, this key type is introduced by commit 3173a18.
Hi
I think it will be to add option to btrfs subvolume list command to
also show the property of sub volumes (ro, compression,...)? do this
is possible?
Thanks,
Ali
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More
(2014/12/16 5:02), Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
This patch print the summary of the filesystem after the creation.
The main fileds printed are:
- devices list with their uuid, devid, path and size
- raid profile (dup,single,raid0...)
- leafsize/nodesize/sectorsize
- filesystem features
On 12/15/2014 01:36 AM, Robert White wrote:
So we don't just hand-wave over statfs(). We include the
dev_item.bytes_excluded in the superblock and we decide once-and-for-all
(with any geometry creation, or completed conversion) how many bytes
just _can't_ be reached but only once we _know_ they
On 12/15/2014 05:58 PM, Duncan wrote:
* Please s/disk/device/, here and possibly elsewhere. I know I'm not the
only one who is trying to make the switch in my own usage, as it looks a
bit foolish (and/or marks the user as an old fogey who's likely to start
lecturing about how a GiB isn't small,
On 12/15/2014 07:30 PM, Robert White wrote:
The above would be ideal. But POSIX says no. f_blocks is defined (only
Correction the linux kernel says total data blocks, POSIX says total
blocks -- it was a mental typo... 8-)
in the comments) as total data blocks in the filesystem and /bin/df
(2014/12/16 5:02), Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
Add -v -q switches to mkfs.btrfs, to control the verbosity of mkfs.btrfs.
Signed-off-by: Goffredo Baroncelli kreij...@inwind.it
Although this patch provides the interface of two new switches,
it doesn't work at all only by this patch. I consider
Hi Ali,
(2014/12/16 11:01), Ali AlipourR wrote:
Hi
I think it will be to add option to btrfs subvolume list command to
also show the property of sub volumes (ro, compression,...)? do this
is possible?
Of course it's possible by writing some code :-D
Is btrfs property get subvol (and some
(2014/12/11 17:31), Dongsheng Yang wrote:
We just need the type of a chunk to calculate the number of parity stripes,
but we have to pass a structure of lookup_map to it. This will prevent some
callers to use it where there is no a convenient lookup_map to be passed.
This patch replace the
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 10:36 PM, Satoru Takeuchi
takeuchi_sat...@jp.fujitsu.com wrote:
Is btrfs property get subvol (and some one liner) insufficient for
your purpose?
I was not previously aware of btrfs property, thanks for mentioning
this. man btrfs does not list the property command;
37 matches
Mail list logo
