there is no matching open parenthesis for the closing parenthesis
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
fs/btrfs/dev-replace.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/dev-replace.c b/fs/btrfs/dev-replace.c
index fb0a7fa..64657b3 100644
---
we are assigning number_devices to the total_bytes,
that's very confusing for a moment
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 10 +-
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
index
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 here.
And notice that btrfs_close_device will check if seed
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
__btrfs_close_devices+0x1c8/0x200 [btrfs]()
which is
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 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
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]()
::
__btrfs_close_devices()
::
WARN_ON(fs_devices-open_devices);
seed fs devices don't participate as rw_device, so don't increment
rw_devices when the device being handled belongs to a seed fs.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
When we replace all the seed device in the system there is
no point in just keeping the btrfs_fs_devices with out
any device
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
index
On 12/08/14 12:00, Konstantinos Skarlatos wrote:
Maybe help with Andrea Mazzoleni's New RAID library supporting up to
six parities? It seems to be a great feature for btrfs.
https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org/msg31735.html
That would be very cool, but at present vanila
On 13/8/2014 2:01 μμ, David Pottage wrote:
On 12/08/14 12:00, Konstantinos Skarlatos wrote:
Maybe help with Andrea Mazzoleni's New RAID library supporting up to
six parities? It seems to be a great feature for btrfs.
https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org/msg31735.html
Cyril,
I fresh installed ubuntu 14.04 with btrfs on the boot SSD and btrfs on a
1Tb HDD.
I had some issue with the UEFI, when I turned it off in the BIOS , all
worked fine.
I am also running three other laptops , all with a single hard drive and
14.04 and run fine.
I so need to remove
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, is this safe for testing yet?
Thanks,
Martin
Btrfs now migrates to use kernel workqueue, but it introduces this hang
problem.
On 2014/08/12 17:52, David Pottage wrote:
[snip] ... if it does not then the file-system has broken the contract
to secure delete a file when you asked it to.
This is a technicality - and it has not necessarily broken the contract.
I think the correct thing to do would be to securely delete
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 7:54 AM, Martin Steigerwald mar...@lichtvoll.de 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, is this safe for testing yet?
I'm more than happy to
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 07:35:49AM +0200, Rasmus Abrahamsen wrote:
I added the /dev/sdd1 to my raid and deleted the missing. Now the
/dev/sdd does not show up anymore and I have a /dev/sdd1. But I still
have the Some devices missing and the command btrfs delete missing
/mnt does not
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, is this safe for testing yet?
Yes, I've confirmed that this
/mnt is the mount point. I now did the following
dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdd
Finally, btrfs does not recognize the partition as part of my raid
anymore, but what's worse is that it now tells me that two missing
devices is a no go, so I cannot mount it as anything but read-only. All
the data is
Hello,
I am using here Debian Jessie whith classic Raid1 mdadm, with two ssd devices
(Crucial_CT256MX100SSD1) and btrfs 3.14-2-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 3.14.13-2
(2014-07-24) x86_64 GNU/Linux.
The server under load. After some days or a week is see in messages (log files,
see below.).
The server is
Sorry subject should be btrfs 3.14-2-amd64 btrfs_file_aio_write problem.
On Wednesday, August 13, 2014 08:39:15 PM you wrote:
Hello,
I am using here Debian Jessie whith classic Raid1 mdadm, with two ssd
devices (Crucial_CT256MX100SSD1) and btrfs 3.14-2-amd64 #1 SMP Debian
3.14.13-2
Summary:
Corrupt a file on a btrfs raid5 volume, mount then read the file, I get an
oops. System is totally hung up, ssh no longer works, etc.
Versions:
kernel-3.16.0-1.cmlb729fdm810v4.fc21.x86_64
btrfs-progs-3.14.2-3.fc21
Kernel 3.16.0-1.fc21.x86_64 with the following patches to btrfs/send.c
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
I'm unable to reproduce this with kernel and progs built from integration
branch (I think, anyway); this is what I built:
git clone git://repo.or.cz/btrfs-progs-unstable/devel.git
cd devel
git checkout integration-20140729
git clone
Rasmus Abrahamsen posted on Wed, 13 Aug 2014 17:36:06 +0200 as excerpted:
I now did the following
dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdd
Finally, btrfs does not recognize the partition as part of my raid
anymore, but what's worse is that it now tells me that two missing
devices is a no go, so I
On Aug 13, 2014, at 5:19 PM, Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net wrote:
2) Wait for the patch to make it into kernel 3.17 and go from there.
Based on integration right now it looks like a lot of stuff.
3) Go read the list and find and cherrypick that patch, then rebuild with
it included, and go
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 11:36 AM, G. Richard Bellamy
rbell...@pteradigm.com wrote:
That being said, how would I determine what the root issue is?
Specifically, the qcow2 file in question seems to have increasing
fragmentation, even with the No_COW attr.
[1]
$ mkfs.btrfs -m raid10 -d raid10
On 05/11/2014 09:51 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
kernel 3.15.0-0.rc5.git0.1.fc21.x86_64
btrfs-progs 3.14
/dev/sdb2 = existing btrfs fs
/dev/sdc3 = unformatted partition
# btrfstune -S1 /dev/sdb2
# mount /dev/sdb2 /mnt
mount: /dev/sdb2 is write-protected, mounting read-only
# btrfs
On Aug 13, 2014, at 9:57 PM, G. Richard Bellamy rbell...@pteradigm.com
wrote:
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 11:36 AM, G. Richard Bellamy
rbell...@pteradigm.com wrote:
That being said, how would I determine what the root issue is?
Specifically, the qcow2 file in question seems to have increasing
Chris,
For the seed replace issues. you have to try this patch set.
Thanks.
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/4716371/
Next, for the failing 'btrfs fi show' issue the following diff
is the latest. The last attempt was ..
[PATCH] btrfs: ioctl BTRFS_IOC_FS_INFO and BTRFS_IOC_DEV_INFO
On Aug 13, 2014, at 10:05 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
On 05/11/2014 09:51 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
kernel 3.15.0-0.rc5.git0.1.fc21.x86_64
btrfs-progs 3.14
/dev/sdb2 = existing btrfs fs
/dev/sdc3 = unformatted partition
# btrfstune -S1 /dev/sdb2
# mount /dev/sdb2
Wow, such a long and detailed message. Thank you so much for taking the
time to do this.
Well, to be honest, I am starting to like the idea of starting over,
although it will be a pain.
Besides, I would have to wait for any distro to make a live disk with
the new btrfs version because my linux
30 matches
Mail list logo
