technical explanation of btrfs internals?

2013-07-24 Thread Thomas Koch
Hi, when I learned Git I made the experience that it was actually a lot easier to understand Git by learning the internals: blobs, trees, commits, tags and how they are connected, e.g. http://eagain.net/articles/git-for-computer-scientists/ Is there a document or presentation out there that

[PATCH v2 0/2] xfstest btrfs/316: test send / receive (was: btrfs/314)

2013-07-24 Thread Jan Schmidt
From: root root@zarzz.(none) These two patches add the announced tests for btrfs send / receive. As requested, the fssum tool is now included. One drawback is that I'm unable to edit configure.ac or whatever needs to be modified in an autotools preferred way. Any hints appreciated, preferrably

[PATCH v2 2/2] xfstests btrfs/316: test send / receive

2013-07-24 Thread Jan Schmidt
Basic send / receive functionality test for btrfs. Requires current version of fsstress built (-x support). Relies on fssum tool but can skip the test if it failed to build. Signed-off-by: Jan Schmidt list@jan-o-sch.net --- README |3 + tests/btrfs/316 | 113

[PATCH] xfstest: don't remove the two first devices from SCRATCH_DEV_POOL

2013-07-24 Thread Stefan Behrens
Since common/config is executed twice, if SCRATCH_DEV_POOL is configured via the environment, the current code removes the first device entry twice which means that you lose the second device for the test. The fix is to not remove anything from SCRATCH_DEV_POOL anymore. That used to be done (I

Re: kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/ctree.c:1145

2013-07-24 Thread Jarosław Siebert
This should have been fixed in 3.10 RC1 with the commit Btrfs: fix tree mod log regression on root split operations. If you still see it in 3.10, apparently it isn't. Can you please post a log of the BUG when this happens with 3.10? from kernel 3.10.1: [ 2911.005736] [ cut here

Re: [PATCH] xfstests: make the scratch device for generic/256 slightly larger

2013-07-24 Thread Ben Myers
On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 03:17:18PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: This is similar to a previous fix I sent. 1 gig makes us do mixed file block groups for btrfs, so these enospc tests will usually fail because we don't have space for metadata, which is the case for this test. So jack the size up

Re: [PATCH] Xfstests/btrfs/308: add snapshot-aware defrag for partial extents testcases

2013-07-24 Thread Ben Myers
On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 05:46:20PM +0800, Liu Bo wrote: This is to test whether snapshot-aware defrag can work well on partial extents. Signed-off-by: Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com --- tests/btrfs/308 | 93 +++ tests/btrfs/308.out |

[PATCH] btrfs: raid56: avoid double allocation

2013-07-24 Thread Andi Shyti
alloc_rbio frees already bbio and raid_map, therefore they don't need to be freed in case it fails Signed-off-by: Andi Shyti a...@etezian.org --- fs/btrfs/raid56.c | 6 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/raid56.c b/fs/btrfs/raid56.c index