On 02/27/2015 03:24 AM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Although we have qgroup level check in btrfs-progs, it's not enough
since other programe may still call ioctl directly not using
btrfs-progs. For example, systemd.
But it's btrfs-progs to be blame since we don't provide a
full-function(like subvolume
On 02/27/2015 03:24 AM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Update qgroup status when rescan is done.
Before this patch, status item is not updated on rescan finish, which
causing the RESCAN and INCONSISTENT flags never cleared.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com
Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik
On 02/10/2015 05:23 AM, Dongsheng Yang wrote:
In function qgroup_excl_accounting(), we need to WARN when
qg-excl is less than what we want to free, same to child
and parents. But currently, for parent qgroup, the WARN_ON()
is located after freeing qg-excl. It will WARN out even we
free it
On 02/27/2015 03:24 AM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Old qgroup_rescan_leaf() comment indicates ret == 2 as complete and
cleared INCONSISTENT flag.
This is not true since it will never return 2, and inside it no codes
will clear INCONSISTENT flag.
The flag clearance is done in btrfs_qgroup_rescan_work().
On 02/27/2015 03:24 AM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Btrfs will create qgroup on subvolume creation if quota is enabled, but
qgroup uses the high bits(currently 16 bits) as level, to build the
inheritance.
However it is fully possible a subvolume can be created with a
subvolumeid larger than 1
On 02/27/2015 03:24 AM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Operation like qgroups assigning/deleting qgroup relations will mostly
cause qgroup data inconsistent, since it needs to do the full rescan to
determine whether shared extents are exclusive or still shared in
parent qgroups.
But there are some
On 02/27/2015 03:24 AM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Previous patch modified the in memory struct but it's not written in
quota tree until next commit.
So user will still get old data using btrfs qgroup show after
assign/remove.
This patch will call btrfs_run_qgroups in assign ioctl so it will be
updated
On 02/10/2015 05:23 AM, Dongsheng Yang wrote:
Currently, when we snapshot a subvol, snapshot will not copy the limits
from srcqgroup.
This patch make the qgroup in snapshot inherit the limit info when create
a snapshot.
Signed-off-by: Dongsheng Yang yangds.f...@cn.fujitsu.com
Reviewed-by:
On 02/27/2015 03:24 AM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
From: Dongsheng Yang yangds.f...@cn.fujitsu.com
we forgot to clear STATUS_FLAG_ON in quota_disable(), it
will cause a problem shown as below:
# mount /dev/sdc /mnt
# btrfs quota enable /mnt
# btrfs quota disable /mnt
#
This is on a Dell Poweredge 2650 with dual Xeons. Running Gentoo x86.
Kernel 3.18.7 with GRSecurity patches (gentoo's hardened-sources).
btrfs-progs version 3.18.2
I originally had the drives setup as raid5 with kernel 3.19 and no
GRSecurity patches (and tried 4.0-rc1)., but kept having
On Sun, Mar 01, 2015 at 09:08:38AM +, Filipe Manana wrote:
When using the fast file fsync code path we can miss the fact that new
writes happened since the last file fsync and therefore return without
waiting for the IO to finish and write the new extents to the fsync log.
Here's an
I second this. I've seen the same behavior.
Clone seems to have evolved a little further than extent-same knows about.
e.g. there is code in the extent-same ioctl that tries to avoid doing
a clone from within one inode to elsewhere in the same inode; however,
the clone ioctl (which extent-same
Hi,
yesterday I did a kernel update on my btrfs test system (Ubuntu
14.04.2) from custom-build kernel 3.19-rc6 to 4.0.0-rc1.
Almost instantly after starting my test script, the system got stuck
with soft lockups (the machine was running the very same test for
weeks on the old kernel without
On 02/27/2015 06:51 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 09:01:10AM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
On 02/27/2015 01:04 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 02:36:33PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
The disadvantage of MS_STRICTATIME |
On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 07:02:01AM +0100, Marcel Ritter wrote:
Hi,
yesterday I did a kernel update on my btrfs test system (Ubuntu
14.04.2) from custom-build kernel 3.19-rc6 to 4.0.0-rc1.
Almost instantly after starting my test script, the system got stuck
with soft lockups (the machine
Hi,
yes it is reproducible.
Just creating a new btrfs filesystem (14 disks, data/mdata raid6,
latest git btrfs-progs)
and mounting this filesystems causes the system to hang (I think I once even got
it mounted, but it did hang shortly after when dd started writing to it).
I just ran some quick
On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 09:43:04PM -0500, Rich Gannon wrote:
This is on a Dell Poweredge 2650 with dual Xeons. Running Gentoo
x86. Kernel 3.18.7 with GRSecurity patches (gentoo's
hardened-sources). btrfs-progs version 3.18.2
I originally had the drives setup as raid5 with kernel 3.19 and
Hi David,
Have you had a chance to look at this? Am very happy to answer
further questions, adjust my implementation, provide a different kind
of test case, etc.
Many Thanks,
Matt
On 28 January 2015 at 19:46, Matt Robinson g...@nerdoftheherd.com wrote:
On 28 January 2015 at 12:55, David
On 2015.02.24 at 13:29 +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
On 2015.02.20 at 11:09 +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
I get the following warnings during Firefox LTO build. lto1-wpa-stream
outputs the final object files in parallel and therefore stresses the
filessystem.
These warnings
When using the fast file fsync code path we can miss the fact that new
writes happened since the last file fsync and therefore return without
waiting for the IO to finish and write the new extents to the fsync log.
Here's an example scenario where the fsync will miss the fact that new
file data
On 2015.03.02 at 12:07 +, Filipe David Manana wrote:
[83159.038708] [ cut here ]
[83159.038716] WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 32343 at fs/btrfs/inode.c:8693
btrfs_destroy_inode+0x278/0x2a0()
[83159.038718] CPU: 2 PID: 32343 Comm: rm Tainted: GW
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Markus Trippelsdorf
mar...@trippelsdorf.de wrote:
On 2015.02.24 at 13:29 +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
On 2015.02.20 at 11:09 +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
I get the following warnings during Firefox LTO build. lto1-wpa-stream
outputs the final
Hi,
I have been testing btrfs send/receive recently.
I got an error rename failed: no such file or directory on receive side.
The followings are simple reproduced steps and related information,
Is there any idea about what this might be or how to fix it?
uanme -a
Linux ubuntu 4.0.0-rc1-custom
From: Zhao Lei zhao...@cn.fujitsu.com
Reproduce:
while true; do
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/btrfs/file count=[75% fs_size]
rm /mnt/btrfs/file
done
Then we can see above loop failed on NO_SPACE.
It it long-term problem since very beginning, because delayed-iput
after rm are not run.
We
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Robbie Ko robbi...@synology.com wrote:
Hi,
I have been testing btrfs send/receive recently.
I got an error rename failed: no such file or directory on receive side.
The followings are simple reproduced steps and related information,
Is there any idea about
Dave could hit this assert consistently running btrfs/078. This is because
when we update the block groups we could truncate the free space, which would
try to delete the csums for that range and dirty the csum root. For this to
happen we have to have already written out the csum root so it's
This got added with my dirty_bgs patch, it's not needed. Thanks,
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik jba...@fb.com
---
fs/btrfs/transaction.c | 3 ---
1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/transaction.c b/fs/btrfs/transaction.c
index a7a413f..3d017d6 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/transaction.c
27 matches
Mail list logo
