Old __merge_refs() in backref.c will even merge refs whose root_id are
different, which makes qgroup gives wrong result.
Fix it by checking ref_for_same_block() before any mode specific works.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
fs/btrfs/backref.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3
The old rbtree implement of ref_head-ref_root sacrificed the insert
order to do better delayed_ref_node merging.
However the out of order behavior makes btrfs_find_all_roots() unable to
find correct root, since it needs the insert order to skip later
delayed_nodes.
Without such ability, qgroup
Hi,
On 01.04.2015 10:03, Omar Sandoval wrote:
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 10:54:55PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Omar Sandoval osan...@osandov.com writes:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 02:30:34PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 02:02:17AM -0700, Omar Sandoval wrote:
Before
This patch replace the rbtree used in ref_head to list.
This has the following two advantages:
1) Qgroup codes now get an accurate view on the delayed_ref order.
This is the basis for the improved qgroup codes.
2) Easier merge logic.
With the new list implement, we only need to care merging the
We provided format path|device in command line.
But btrfs device stats doesn't work if device is not mounted.
Also fix some tailing whitespace.
Signed-off-by: Chen Hanxiao chenhanx...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
Documentation/btrfs-device.txt | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
If no one disagree, I'll try to implement it using list.
In fact, after an easy patch and some tests, it doesn't bring much
performance regression, and delayed_ref_nodes are still mergeable.
Thanks,
Qu
Original Message
Subject: Is rbtree really needed to restore ref_root
btrfs device delete /dev/sdf5 /mnt/data2
ERROR: error removing the device '/dev/sdf5' - Inappropriate ioctl for
device
very strange. 'btrfs fi show -m' shows btrfs fs(s) that are mounted.
- Anand
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a
+bool debugfs_abort_transaction(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info)
+{
+ if (!btrfs_debugfs_label_trans_abort[0])
+ return false;
+ return strcmp(fs_info-super_copy-label,
+ btrfs_debugfs_label_trans_abort) == 0;
+}
+
label is not mandatory to be
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 7:41 AM, Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com wrote:
+bool debugfs_abort_transaction(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info)
+{
+ if (!btrfs_debugfs_label_trans_abort[0])
+ return false;
+ return strcmp(fs_info-super_copy-label,
+
Commit 3a8b36f37806 (Btrfs: fix data loss in the fast fsync path) added
a performance regression for that causes an unnecessary sync of the log
trees (fs/subvol and root log trees) when 2 consecutive fsyncs are done
against a file, without no writes or any metadata updates to the inode in
between
Hello,
I have some files which I hope their on-disk data can be on fixed location of
disk. My understanding is that defragmentation operation can potentially move
data blocks of a file.
So, can I avoid certain file being defragmented in btrfs?
Thanks
Mike
Eric found something like this and has a fix with in the email.
Sub: I think btrfs: fix leak of path in btrfs_find_item broke stable
trees ...
Anand
On 03/24/2015 06:40 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 2:31 AM, Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com wrote:
Do you have this fix ..
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 10:54:55PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Omar Sandoval osan...@osandov.com writes:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 02:30:34PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 02:02:17AM -0700, Omar Sandoval wrote:
Before commit bafc9b754f75 (vfs: More precise tests in
Cleanup the rb_tree merge/insert/update functions, since now we use list
instead of rb_tree now.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
fs/btrfs/delayed-ref.c | 174 -
1 file changed, 174 deletions(-)
diff --git
On 01/04/15 08:06, Anand Jain wrote:
btrfs device delete /dev/sdf5 /mnt/data2
ERROR: error removing the device '/dev/sdf5' - Inappropriate ioctl for
device
very strange. 'btrfs fi show -m' shows btrfs fs(s) that are mounted.
Looks like my /dev/sdf isn't responding with anything useful
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 12:03:28AM -0700, Omar Sandoval wrote:
--- a/fs/btrfs/super.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/super.c
@@ -1024,6 +1024,10 @@ static int btrfs_show_options(struct seq_file *seq,
struct dentry *dentry)
struct btrfs_root *root = info-tree_root;
char *compress_type;
+
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 12:42:04PM +, Wang, Zhiye wrote:
Hello,
I have some files which I hope their on-disk data can be on fixed
location of disk. My understanding is that defragmentation operation
can potentially move data blocks of a file.
So, can I avoid certain file being
Looks like an option to use devid to delete a device would
have mitigated the issue. Also the error reported is no
where near the reality. Will fix them.
Thanks for reporting.
Anand
On 04/01/2015 06:54 PM, Martin wrote:
On 01/04/15 08:06, Anand Jain wrote:
btrfs device delete
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 6:23 PM, Sophie just4pleis...@gmail.com wrote:
On 24/03/15 17:34, Chris Mason wrote:
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 9:43 AM, Sophie Dexter
just4pleis...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 20/03/2015 15:19, Sophie Dexter wrote:
I'm given to understand that this is the right place to
Hello,
I have a 6 device RAID-1 filesystem:
$ sudo btrfs fi df /srv/tank
Data, RAID1: total=1.24TiB, used=1.24TiB
System, RAID1: total=32.00MiB, used=184.00KiB
Metadata, RAID1: total=3.00GiB, used=1.65GiB
unknown, single: total=512.00MiB, used=0.00
$ sudo btrfs fi sh /srv/tank
Label: 'tank'
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
A failure of the
HDD cannot be ruled out, low power conditions, cheap consumer part...
Well you have to rule that out before anyone on this list can really
help. Try booting Fedora 21 install media, and using smartctl
Hi Chris, list,
thanks for your debugging ideas so far. Now this gets interesting. I
booted off a LiveUSB disk, and it just mounted sysroot. WTH?
See below. Perhaps the newer kernel (in latest F21) has regressed in
handling some kinds of errors during mount, or the dracut/systemd
mounting
Hi, Andy,
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 03:11:14PM +, Andy Smith wrote:
I have a 6 device RAID-1 filesystem:
[snip tale of a filesystem with out of data data on one copy of the RAID]
I have now got a new enclosure and put this system back together
with all six devices. I was not expecting
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Martin Langhoff
martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
See below. Perhaps the newer kernel (in latest F21) has regressed in
handling some kinds of errors during mount, or the dracut/systemd
mounting process is less resilient than mounting under a fully booted
system?
Whenever I have these boot problems, I'm noticing that sometimes the
device, /dev/sda5, is showing up with lsblk (libblkid) as
/dev/block/8:5 while everything else (not-Btrfs) on that device shows
up as /dev/sdaX. Does anyone know what that might mean?
Chris Murphy
--
To unsubscribe from this
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 01:22:42PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 12:03:28AM -0700, Omar Sandoval wrote:
--- a/fs/btrfs/super.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/super.c
@@ -1024,6 +1024,10 @@ static int btrfs_show_options(struct seq_file *seq,
struct dentry *dentry)
struct
Signed-off-by: Davide Italiano dccitali...@gmail.com
---
fs/btrfs/inode.c | 190 ++-
1 file changed, 189 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
index d2e732d..49b0867 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/inode.c
+++
This is an attempt to implement RENAME_EXCHANGE in btrfs.
It survived basic testing and I think it's ready for others' feedback.
I'll stress test {and, or} rewrite it depending on people's comments.
Davide Italiano (1):
Btrfs: RENAME_EXCHANGE semantic for renameat2()
fs/btrfs/inode.c | 190
Before this patch, ext*_image is always set NODATACSUM inode flag.
However btrfs-convert will set normal file with DATACUSM flag by
default, and generate checksum for regular file extent.
Now, a regular file extent is shared by a btrfs file inode with DATACSUM
and ext*_image with NODATACSUM, and
Before previous patch, btrfs-convert will result fsck complain if there
is any regular file extent in newly converted btrfs.
Add test case for it.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
tests/convert-tests.sh | 85 --
1 file changed,
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
When I had this same btrfs check error, it was the exact inode number
and same /etc/shadow file. I didn't diff the two shadow files, but I
That's too bizarre for words. Two folks, on two different systems,
getting btrfs
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 12:16 PM, Martin Langhoff
martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
When I had this same btrfs check error, it was the exact inode number
and same /etc/shadow file. I didn't diff the two shadow files, but
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
That won't fix it. Once errors 400 appears, at this point you have to
replace the affected file.
Interesting.
Right now I am booting without problems. I have no evidence of
continued problems. What would I do to check
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Martin Langhoff
martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
# mount /dev/sda6 /mysysroot
Apr 01 11:26:51 localhost kernel: BTRFS info (device sda6): disk space
caching is enabled
Apr 01 11:26:56 localhost kernel: BTRFS: checking UUID tree
Apr 01 11:26:56 localhost kernel:
Anand,
Thanks for picking up.
The devid option sounds good.
Thanks,
Martin
On 01/04/15 14:15, Anand Jain wrote:
Looks like an option to use devid to delete a device would
have mitigated the issue. Also the error reported is no
where near the reality. Will fix them.
Thanks for
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Martin Langhoff
martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Martin Langhoff
martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
See below. Perhaps the newer kernel (in latest F21) has regressed in
handling some kinds of errors during mount, or the
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
mount /dev/sda6 /mnt
btrfs inspect-internal inode-resolve 39841 /mnt
on the booted system...
# uname -a
Linux tp-martin.remote-learner.net 3.18.9-200.fc21.x86_64 #1 SMP Mon
Mar 9 15:10:50 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64
On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 11:24 PM, Guenter Roeck li...@roeck-us.net
wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 01:58:46AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
Building alpha:allmodconfig fails with
fs/btrfs/inode.c: In function 'check_direct_IO':
fs/btrfs/inode.c:8050:2: error: implicit declaration of function
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Martin Langhoff
martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
That won't fix it. Once errors 400 appears, at this point you have to
replace the affected file.
Interesting.
Right now I am booting
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 03:11:06PM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
This tests tests four conditions where discard can potentially not
discard unused extents completely.
We test, with -o discard and with fstrim, scenarios of removing many
relatively small files and removing several large files.
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 2:54 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
Re-run the btrfs check. The error is still there even after a --repair.
Bingo! You are right the error persists.
It has no effect on my use of the system right now. Is anyone
interested in debugging this further?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 4/1/15 2:44 PM, Brian Foster wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 03:11:06PM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
This tests tests four conditions where discard can potentially
not discard unused extents completely.
We test, with -o discard and with fstrim,
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Martin Langhoff
martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
mount /dev/sda6 /mnt
btrfs inspect-internal inode-resolve 39841 /mnt
on the booted system...
# uname -a
Linux
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 03:01:07PM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 4/1/15 2:44 PM, Brian Foster wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 03:11:06PM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
This tests tests four conditions where discard can potentially
not discard
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 2:50 AM, Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com wrote:
Eric found something like this and has a fix with in the email.
Sub: I think btrfs: fix leak of path in btrfs_find_item broke stable
trees ...
I don't mind trying this patch if the maintainers recommend it. I'm
still
I am attempting to see if this message goes through. My first one got
returned as I didn't know gmail defaulted to HTML.
My second and third never seemed distributed.
Are attachments allowed?
According to this,
https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Btrfs_mailing_list, they are,
but other
On 04/01/2015 12:28 PM, Chris Mason wrote:
On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 11:24 PM, Guenter Roeck li...@roeck-us.net wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 01:58:46AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
Building alpha:allmodconfig fails with
fs/btrfs/inode.c: In function 'check_direct_Excellent idea. Done,IO':
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Guenter Roeck li...@roeck-us.net
wrote:
On 04/01/2015 12:28 PM, Chris Mason wrote:
On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 11:24 PM, Guenter Roeck li...@roeck-us.net
wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 01:58:46AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
Building alpha:allmodconfig fails with
Related bugs:
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=68411
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1037963
The RHBZ one also mentioned the shadow file.
Anyway, it seems to be a somewhat known problem, but it's just not
known yet what causes it.
Chris Murphy
--
To unsubscribe from this
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Martin Langhoff
martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 2:54 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
Re-run the btrfs check. The error is still there even after a --repair.
Bingo! You are right the error persists.
It has no effect on my
50 matches
Mail list logo
