On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 08:36:55AM -0700, Mark Fasheh wrote:
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 04:47:52AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 11:44:54AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 06:48:05AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 04:47:52AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 11:44:54AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 06:48:05AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 09:02:07AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
This won't work, try having
On 9/10/13 11:56 AM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 08:36:55AM -0700, Mark Fasheh wrote:
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 04:47:52AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 11:44:54AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 06:48:05AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 11:44:54AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 06:48:05AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 09:02:07AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
This won't work, try having 1 subvolumes with dirty inodes and do
sync then
go skiing,
On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 04:51:46PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
Not possible, this will break other things as subvolumes have their own inode
space, it will confuse applications that get multiples of an inode number for
different devices with the same st_dev. Each subvolume has it's own anonymous
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 05:13:49AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 04:51:46PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
Not possible, this will break other things as subvolumes have their own
inode
space, it will confuse applications that get multiples of an inode number
for
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 09:02:07AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
This won't work, try having 1 subvolumes with dirty inodes and do sync
then
go skiing, you'll have time :). Thanks,
Why would the dirty inodes make any difference? If you share the bdi
between the subvolumes the sync workflow
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 06:48:05AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 09:02:07AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
This won't work, try having 1 subvolumes with dirty inodes and do sync
then
go skiing, you'll have time :). Thanks,
Why would the dirty inodes make any
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 06:48:05AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 09:02:07AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
This won't work, try having 1 subvolumes with dirty inodes and do sync
then
go skiing, you'll have time :). Thanks,
Why would the dirty inodes make any
stat(2) on btrfs returns a custom device, but proc uses s_dev from the super
block. This causes problems (abi breakage) because software (and users) are
not expecting the kernel to return different devices from these calls.
This patch fixes the problem by adding a new superblock flag,
On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 12:57:18PM -0700, Mark Fasheh wrote:
stat(2) on btrfs returns a custom device, but proc uses s_dev from the super
block. This causes problems (abi breakage) because software (and users) are
not expecting the kernel to return different devices from these calls.
So fix
On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 01:18:26PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 12:57:18PM -0700, Mark Fasheh wrote:
stat(2) on btrfs returns a custom device, but proc uses s_dev from the super
block. This causes problems (abi breakage) because software (and users) are
not
12 matches
Mail list logo
