We may try to flush some dirty pages when there is no enough space to reserve.
But it is possible that this operation fails, in order to get enough space to
reserve successfully, we will sync all the delalloc file. This operation is
safe, we needn't worry about the case that the filesystem goes
writeback_inodes_sb(_nr)_if_idle() is re-implemented by replacing down_read()
with down_read_trylock() because
- If -s_umount is write locked, then the sb is not idle. That is
writeback_inodes_sb(_nr)_if_idle() needn't wait for the lock.
- writeback_inodes_sb(_nr)_if_idle() grabs s_umount lock
This is based on Josef's Btrfs: turbo charge fsync.
The current btrfs checks if an inode is in log by comparing
root's last_log_commit to inode's last_sub_trans[2].
But the problem is that this root-last_log_commit is shared among
inodes.
Say we have N inodes to be logged, after the first
This is based on Josef's Btrfs: turbo charge fsync.
If an inode is a BTRFS_INODE_NODATASUM one, we don't need to look for csum
items any more.
Signed-off-by: Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com
---
fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 23 ---
1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
From: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
btrfslabel.c | 90 ++
ioctl.h |2 +
utils.h |1 +
3 files changed, 62 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
diff --git a/btrfslabel.c
From: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 10 ++
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 30 ++
fs/btrfs/ioctl.h |2 ++
3 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
Hi Anand,
I have posted a patch for set label back to last year, which can be
found at:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1124642/
Besides that, we have discussed to use 50 as the ioctl(2) number at
that time.
task assignment in our wiki page:
I've been able to run the Debian 7 installer (beta1) and get a working
Debian system on btrfs RAID1 root FS.
A few manual steps and patches required - it would be useful to get
feedback about this process. I might have a go at patching partman to
fully support this through the installer menu.
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 10:42:33AM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote:
With 3.5.2, I created 5 dm-crypted devices from 5 drives.
I created a raid0 btrfs filesystem and wrote stuff to it.
One drive died.
Is degraded mode supposed to crash for now, or is this something I can
provide more info on to help
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 11:42:33AM -0600, Marc MERLIN wrote:
With 3.5.2, I created 5 dm-crypted devices from 5 drives.
I created a raid0 btrfs filesystem and wrote stuff to it.
One drive died.
I fixed this in btrfs-next, please build that and verify it fixes your problem.
Thanks,
Josef
--
Hi Linus,
I've split out the big send/receive update from my last pull request and
now have just the fixes in my for-linus branch:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus
For anyone who wants send/receive updates, they are maintained as well.
But it is has
Hi Linus,
I've split out the big send/receive update from my last pull request and
now have just the fixes in my for-linus branch:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus
For anyone who wants send/receive updates, they are maintained as well.
But it is has
Ah. I missed that. Thanks.
So should use your original patch.
-Anand
On 29/08/12 17:00, Jie Liu wrote:
Hi Anand,
I have posted a patch for set label back to last year, which can be
found at:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1124642/
Besides that, we have discussed to use 50 as the
Jeff,
I don't find the get label ioctl part unless I am missing something.
Any idea?
Thxs, -Anand
On 30/08/12 09:54, Anand Jain wrote:
Ah. I missed that. Thanks.
So should use your original patch.
-Anand
On 29/08/12 17:00, Jie Liu wrote:
Hi Anand,
I have posted a patch for set label
This patch adds btrfs device add/delete test to xfstests. Though case 265 also
does device add/delete test, it is too simple. Compare with case 265, this case
is more complex.
First, this case test the basic function on different storage profiles, on
different
number of the devices.
Second,
On 08/30/12 13:44, Anand Jain wrote:
Jeff,
I don't find the get label ioctl part unless I am missing something.
Any idea?
Yes, you're right, I have not post the get label at that time.
The original patch could be revised with this support easily.
How about using one structure and one ioctl
16 matches
Mail list logo