Re: [PATCH] btrfs: raid56: Remove unused variant in lock_stripe_add

At 01/21/2017 02:24 AM, David Sterba wrote: On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 10:23:06AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: Variant 'walk' in lock_stripe_add() is never used. Remove it. Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo Added to 4.11 queue, thaks. Changelog and subject edited. Thanks for

Re: [PATCH 1/3] btrfs: improve inode's outstanding_extents computation

Hi Liu, Sorry for the late reply. At 01/04/2017 07:36 AM, Liu Bo wrote: (Resend this reply due to a message that there is an invalid email address.) On Tue, Jan 03, 2017 at 01:00:45PM -0800, Liu Bo wrote: On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 04:39:45PM +0800, Wang Xiaoguang wrote: This issue was

Re: RAID56 status?

At 01/23/2017 12:42 PM, Zane Zakraisek wrote: Hi Qu, I've seen a good amount of Raid56 patches come in from you on the mailing list. Do these catch a large portion of the Raid56 bugs, or are they only the beginning? :) Hard to say, it can be just tip of a iceberg, or beginning of RAID56

Re: RAID56 status?

At 01/23/2017 08:25 AM, Jan Vales wrote: On 01/22/2017 11:39 PM, Hugo Mills wrote: On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 11:35:49PM +0100, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: On Sun, 2017-01-22 at 22:22 +0100, Jan Vales wrote: Therefore my question: whats the status of raid5/6 is in btrfs? Is it somehow

Re: btrfs check lowmem vs original

At 01/20/2017 11:10 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 10:45 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote: Another file system, 15 minutes old with two mounts in its whole lifetime, and only written with kernel 4.10-rc3 has over 30 lines of varying numbers: ERROR: root 257

Re: RAID56 status?

On 01/22/2017 11:39 PM, Hugo Mills wrote: > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 11:35:49PM +0100, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: >> On Sun, 2017-01-22 at 22:22 +0100, Jan Vales wrote: >>> Therefore my question: whats the status of raid5/6 is in btrfs? >>> Is it somehow "production"-ready by now? >> AFAIK,

Re: RAID56 status?

Hugo Mills wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 11:35:49PM +0100, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: On Sun, 2017-01-22 at 22:22 +0100, Jan Vales wrote: Therefore my question: whats the status of raid5/6 is in btrfs? Is it somehow "production"-ready by

Re: RAID56 status?

On Sun, 2017-01-22 at 22:39 +, Hugo Mills wrote: >    It's still all valid. Nothing's changed. > >    How would you like it to be updated? "Nope, still broken"? The kernel version mentioned there is 4.7... so noone (at least endusers) really knows whether it's just no longer maintainer or

Re: RAID56 status?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 11:35:49PM +0100, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > On Sun, 2017-01-22 at 22:22 +0100, Jan Vales wrote: > > Therefore my question: whats the status of raid5/6 is in btrfs? > > Is it somehow "production"-ready by now? > AFAIK,

Re: RAID56 status?

On Sun, 2017-01-22 at 22:22 +0100, Jan Vales wrote: > Therefore my question: whats the status of raid5/6 is in btrfs? > Is it somehow "production"-ready by now? AFAIK, what's on the - apparently already no longer updated -  https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Status still applies, and RAID56

RAID56 status?

Hi there! Im using btrfs since like 2.28 on my laptop without too many problems. Now im thinking of going further and go for btrfs raid6 on my pc. I dont mind to restore backups once in a while, but it should not be like on a weekly basis. Therefore my question: whats the status of raid5/6 is