On Friday, 29 October, 2010, Vladi Gergov wrote:
kernel: scratch git repo from today 10.29.10 @ 14:30 PST
Btrfs v0.19-35-g1b444cd-dirty
gypsyops @ /mnt sudo btrfs filesystem show
Label: 'das4' uuid: d0e5137f-e5e7-49da-91f6-a9c4e4e72c6f
Total devices 3 FS bytes used 1.38TB
devid
Hi,
I have a raid1 setup with a missing device. I have added a new device and
everything seems to be working fine, except I cannot remove the old, missing,
device. There is no error - but the 'some devices missing' tag doesn't go away.
r...@willvo:~# btrfs filesystem show
failed to read
This patch was generated using the Coccinelle scripts and btrfs
code in v2.6.36-9657-g7a3f8fe.
Use ERR_CAST inlined function instead of ERR_PTR(PTR_ERR(...))
The semantic patch that makes this change is available
in scripts/coccinelle/api/err_cast.cocci.
More information about semantic
On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 01:07:27AM +0100, Hugo Mills wrote:
This patch introduces a basic form of progress monitoring for balance
operations, by counting the number of block groups remaining. The
information is exposed to userspace by an ioctl.
Dammit. An unrefreshed quilt patch let an
Hi everyone,
There were some minor conflicts with Linus' current tree, so my branch
is merged with Linus' tree as of this morning.
It includes some new writeback helpers so that btrfs can kick off IO to
reclaim delalloc space. I bounced a few different interfaces off
Christoph before this one.
Hi Chris,
These patches from myself and Josef are still relevant, but not in
your last mainline pull request.
Can you add them if you are happy please? I've rediffed them [1,2]
against your for-linux tree.
Many thanks,
Daniel
--- [1]
Fix use-after-free on error path.
Signed-off-by: Josef
On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 6:51 AM, Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com wrote:
There were some minor conflicts with Linus' current tree, so my branch
is merged with Linus' tree as of this morning.
Gaah. Please don't do this. Unless it's a _really_ messy merge, I
really do want to do the merge.
On Saturday, 30 October, 2010, Hugo Mills wrote:
These two patches give a degree of control over balance operations.
The first makes it possible to get an idea of how much work remains to
do, by tracking the number of block groups (chunks) that need to be
moved/rewritten. The second patch
On Saturday, 30 October, 2010, Hugo Mills wrote:
These two patches complement the previous two kernel-side
patches. The first implements a way of displaying the current progress
of any running balance process. The second patch allows a running
balance to be cancelled.
I'm a bit
Signed-off-by: Sage Weil s...@newdream.net
---
ioctl.h | 39 ++-
1 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/ioctl.h b/ioctl.h
index 776d7a9..5a03317 100644
--- a/ioctl.h
+++ b/ioctl.h
@@ -23,13 +23,28 @@
#define BTRFS_IOCTL_MAGIC 0x94
This is identical to 'snapshot', but uses the new async snapshot creation
ioctl, and prints out the transid the new snapshot will be committed
with.
Signed-off-by: Sage Weil s...@newdream.net
---
btrfs.c |8 +++-
btrfs_cmds.c | 32 +++-
btrfs_cmds.h |
The 'start-sync' command initiates a sync, but does not wait for it to
complete. A transaction is printed that can be fed to 'wait-sync', which
will wait for it to commit.
'wait-sync' can also be used in combination with 'async-snapshot' to wait
for an async snapshot creation to commit.
On Saturday, 30 October, 2010, Sage Weil wrote:
This is identical to 'snapshot', but uses the new async snapshot creation
ioctl, and prints out the transid the new snapshot will be committed
with.
Signed-off-by: Sage Weil s...@newdream.net
---
btrfs.c |8 +++-
btrfs_cmds.c |
On Saturday, 30 October, 2010, Sage Weil wrote:
The 'start-sync' command initiates a sync, but does not wait for it to
complete. A transaction is printed that can be fed to 'wait-sync', which
will wait for it to commit.
'wait-sync' can also be used in combination with 'async-snapshot' to
On Saturday, 30 October, 2010, Sage Weil wrote:
This is identical to 'snapshot', but uses the new async snapshot creation
ioctl, and prints out the transid the new snapshot will be committed
with.
Only for curiosity, how long may take snapshot a tree ? It should be only a
copy and update of
On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 08:31:05 +0200
Roman Kapusta roman.kapu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 00:03, Pat Regan theh...@patshead.com wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 10:39:48 +0200
Xavier Nicollet nicol...@jeru.org wrote:
Le 26 octobre 2010 à 15:15, Pat Regan a écrit:
I turned off
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Chris Samuel ch...@csamuel.org wrote:
A friend of mine who builds storage systems designed for HPC
use has been keeping an eye on btrfs and has just done some
testing of it with 2.6.36 and seems to like what he sees in
terms of stability.
That's a *very*
For example:
No device-yanking tests were done.
No power-cord yanking tests were done.
No device cables were yanked, shaken, or plugged/unplugged in rapid
succession.
No dd the raw device underneath the filesystem while doing file
I/O tests were done.
No recovery tests were done.
On 10/30/2010 05:19 PM, Freddie Cash wrote:
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Chris Samuelch...@csamuel.org wrote:
A friend of mine who builds storage systems designed for HPC
use has been keeping an eye on btrfs and has just done some
testing of it with 2.6.36 and seems to like what he sees in
On 10/30/2010 12:37 AM, William Uther wrote:
Hi,
I have a raid1 setup with a missing device. I have added a new device and
everything seems to be working fine, except I cannot remove the old, missing,
device. There is no error - but the 'some devices missing' tag doesn't go away.
20 matches
Mail list logo
