Re: transid problem after a power-failure

2011-01-08 Thread Mikael Cluseau
Hello again, (this is a status update) from what I begin to understand, the real problem is not the transid, which is a kind of warning, but the failed assertion on tree_root, meaning that the read_tree_block call at disk-io.nc:736 fails. The GDB backtrace is the following : Reading symbols

[PATCH retry] btrfs: mount failure return value fix

2011-01-08 Thread Dave Young
I happened to pass swap partition as root partition in cmdline, then kernel panic and tell me about Cannot open root device. It is not correct, in fact it is a fs type mismatch instead of 'no device'. Eventually I found btrfs mounting failed with -EIO, it should be -EINVAL. The logic in

Re: btrfsck segmentation fault

2011-01-08 Thread Fajar A. Nugraha
On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 5:29 AM, cwillu cwi...@cwillu.com wrote: On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 3:15 PM, Andrew Schretter schr...@math.duke.edu wrote: I have a 10TB btrfs filesystem over iSCSI that is currently unmountable.  I'm currently running Fedora 13 with a recent Fedora 14 kernel

Re: Various Questions

2011-01-08 Thread Carl Cook
In addition to the questions below, if anyone has a chance could you advise on why my destination drive has more data than the source after this command: # rsync --hard-links --delete --inplace --archive --numeric-ids /media/disk/* /home sending incremental file list sent 658660 bytes

Re: Atomic file data replace API

2011-01-08 Thread Olaf van der Spek
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 8:29 PM, Thomas Bellman bell...@nsc.liu.se wrote: What is the visibility of the changes for other processes supposed to be in the meantime?  I.e., if things happen in this order: Should be atomic too, at close time. 1. Process A does fda = open(foo.txt,

Re: Various Questions

2011-01-08 Thread Ian! D. Allen
On Sat, Jan 08, 2011 at 05:25:19AM -0800, Carl Cook wrote: In addition to the questions below, if anyone has a chance could you advise on why my destination drive has more data than the source after this command: # rsync --hard-links --delete --inplace --archive --numeric-ids /media/disk/*

Re: [PATCH] btrfs: Mem leak in btrfs_get_acl()

2011-01-08 Thread Jesper Juhl
On Fri, 7 Jan 2011, Aneesh Kumar K. V wrote: On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 22:45:21 +0100 (CET), Jesper Juhl j...@chaosbits.net wrote: It seems to me that we leak the memory allocated to 'value' in btrfs_get_acl() if the call to posix_acl_from_xattr() fails. Here's a patch that attempts to

Re: Atomic file data replace API

2011-01-08 Thread Thomas Bellman
Olaf van der Spek wrote: On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 8:29 PM, Thomas Bellman bell...@nsc.liu.se wrote: What is the visibility of the changes for other processes supposed to be in the meantime? I.e., if things happen in this order: Should be atomic too, at close time. 1. Process A does fda =

Re: btrfsck segmentation fault

2011-01-08 Thread Justin Chudgar
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I've got the same problem. That is, I have a 2.6.35 btrfs volume that segfaults and causes a kernel oops upon attempts to mount it. There is some data on there that was not covered by the daily backup. Though it is not the end of the world, I'd like

Re: Various Questions

2011-01-08 Thread Freddie Cash
On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 5:25 AM, Carl Cook cac...@quantum-sci.com wrote: In addition to the questions below, if anyone has a chance could you advise on why my destination drive has more data  than the source after this command: # rsync --hard-links --delete --inplace --archive --numeric-ids