Hello,
>
> When removing a subvol, if the related qgroup has no child qgroup, we should
> destroy
> it at the same time. Also remove the TODO entry in qgroup.c.
My two cents here:
Take a quick look at this, i am not sure whether this is right way to do it.
Actually, i think we can only remove
When removing a subvol, if the related qgroup has no child qgroup, we should
destroy
it at the same time. Also remove the TODO entry in qgroup.c.
Signed-off-by: Dongsheng Yang
---
fs/btrfs/inode.c | 4
fs/btrfs/qgroup.c | 1 -
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/
When a qgroup has parents but no child, it should be removable in
Theory. But currently, we can not remove it when it has
either parent or child.
Example:
# btrfs quota enable /mnt
# btrfs qgroup create 1/0 /mnt
# btrfs qgroup create 2/0 /mnt
# btrfs qgroup assign 1
When we create a qgroup inheriting a qgroup, we need to check the level
of them. Otherwise, there is a chance where a qgroup can inherit another qgroup
at the same level.
Signed-off-by: Dongsheng Yang
---
fs/btrfs/qgroup.c | 6 ++
fs/btrfs/qgroup.h | 9 +
2 files changed, 15 insertio
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 01:52:58AM +, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> glibc 2.10+ (5+ years old) enables all the desired features:
> _XOPEN_SOURCE 700, __XOPEN2K8, POSIX_C_SOURCE, DEFAULT_SOURCE; with a
> single _GNU_SOURCE define in the makefile alone. For portability to
> other libc implementati
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 03:27:44PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> Add explain on 'source' and 'target', which is somewhat confusing for
> users who want to restore dumped image.
>
> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
Applied with minor changes. Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscrib
And galloped away to Altar. Gabilonda carried him to Guaymas, from where he was
afterwards sent to California. It has been stated that the corpses were left in
the streets for the hogs to eat, but the cure of Caborca assured me that he had
a tr
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Philipp Klaus Krause wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've been using btrfs on a Debian GNU/Linux system. After about 9
> months, I encountered my first filesystem issue. It first appeared while
> doing an rm -rf, which resulted in a
>
> rm: cannot remove […]: Directory not em
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:28 PM, Andreas Philipp
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Due to the known (and fixed) bug in kernel 3.17.0 one of my btrfs
> volume suffers from unreadable and - even worse - uneraseable
> snapshots. Whenever such a snapshot is accessed there is "parent
> transid verify failed" in dmesg.
Hello,
I've been using btrfs on a Debian GNU/Linux system. After about 9
months, I encountered my first filesystem issue. It first appeared while
doing an rm -rf, which resulted in a
rm: cannot remove […]: Directory not empty
a du -s on the directory gives an
BTRFS critical (device dm-2): inval
-Original message-
From: Brett King
Sent: Wed 01-21-2015 09:26 am
Subject:RE: Recovery options for FS forced readonly due to 3.17
snapshot bug
CC: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org;
To: fdman...@gmail.com;
> From: Filipe David Manana
> Sent: Tue 01-20-2015 11:40 pm
> Subj
On Wed, 21 Jan 2015 15:47:54 +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>> On Wed, 21 Jan 2015 11:53:34 +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> [snipped]
> This will cause another problem, nobody can ensure there will be next
> transaction and the change may
> never to written into disk.
First, the pending cha
12 matches
Mail list logo
