Re: [ANNOUNCE] Btrfs v0.12 released

2008-02-12 Thread Chris Mason
On Tuesday 12 February 2008, David Miller wrote: > From: Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 08:42:20 -0500 > > > The kernel is actually worse, because the set/get macros are more > > complex. Some live in ctree.h like in the progs, but the nasty ones live > > in

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Btrfs v0.12 released

2008-02-12 Thread Chris Mason
On Tuesday 12 February 2008, David Miller wrote: From: Chris Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 08:42:20 -0500 The kernel is actually worse, because the set/get macros are more complex. Some live in ctree.h like in the progs, but the nasty ones live in struct-funcs.c This is

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Btrfs v0.12 released

2008-02-11 Thread David Miller
From: Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 08:42:20 -0500 > The kernel is actually worse, because the set/get macros are more complex. > Some live in ctree.h like in the progs, but the nasty ones live in > struct-funcs.c This is really problematic, because you've got these

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Btrfs v0.12 released

2008-02-11 Thread Chris Mason
On Sunday 10 February 2008, David Miller wrote: > From: Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2008 12:00:13 -0500 > > This function never returns an error, so the simplest fix was to > return the hash value which avoids all of the issues. In attempting > other schemes to fix this, I

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Btrfs v0.12 released

2008-02-11 Thread Chris Mason
On Sunday 10 February 2008, David Miller wrote: From: Chris Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2008 12:00:13 -0500 This function never returns an error, so the simplest fix was to return the hash value which avoids all of the issues. In attempting other schemes to fix this, I found it

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Btrfs v0.12 released

2008-02-11 Thread David Miller
From: Chris Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 08:42:20 -0500 The kernel is actually worse, because the set/get macros are more complex. Some live in ctree.h like in the progs, but the nasty ones live in struct-funcs.c This is really problematic, because you've got these things

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Btrfs v0.12 released

2008-02-10 Thread David Miller
From: Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2008 12:00:13 -0500 > So, here's v0.12. I couldn't even make a filesystem on sparc64 without the following patch. The first problem is that these SETGET macros lose typing information, and therefore can't see the 'packed' attribute and

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Btrfs v0.12 released

2008-02-10 Thread David Miller
From: Chris Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2008 12:00:13 -0500 So, here's v0.12. I couldn't even make a filesystem on sparc64 without the following patch. The first problem is that these SETGET macros lose typing information, and therefore can't see the 'packed' attribute and

[ANNOUNCE] Btrfs v0.12 released

2008-02-06 Thread Chris Mason
Hello everyone, I wasn't planning on releasing v0.12 yet, and it was supposed to have some initial support for multiple devices. But, I have made a number of performance fixes and small bug fixes, and I wanted to get them out there before the (destabilizing) work on multiple-devices took

[ANNOUNCE] Btrfs v0.12 released

2008-02-06 Thread Chris Mason
Hello everyone, I wasn't planning on releasing v0.12 yet, and it was supposed to have some initial support for multiple devices. But, I have made a number of performance fixes and small bug fixes, and I wanted to get them out there before the (destabilizing) work on multiple-devices took