Re: [PATCH] btrfs: Remove WARN_ON for unaligned device created before v4.13 and adds more user friendly output

At Sat, 23 Sep 2017 10:19:26 +0900, Satoru Takeuchi wrote: > > At Wed, 20 Sep 2017 15:18:43 +0900, > Qu Wenruo wrote: > > > > Commit 7dfb8be11b5d ("btrfs: Round down values which are written for > > total_bytes_size") is fixing the unaligned device size caused by > > adding/shrinking device. > >

Re: [PATCH] btrfs: Remove WARN_ON for unaligned device created before v4.13 and adds more user friendly output

At Wed, 20 Sep 2017 15:18:43 +0900, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > Commit 7dfb8be11b5d ("btrfs: Round down values which are written for > total_bytes_size") is fixing the unaligned device size caused by > adding/shrinking device. > > It added a new WARN_ON() when device size is unaligned. > This is fine

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: use self-explaining variable

On 2017年09月23日 08:48, Liu Bo wrote: On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 08:46:55AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: On 2017年09月23日 07:36, Liu Bo wrote: This uses a bool 'do_backup' to help understand this piece of code. Signed-off-by: Liu Bo --- This is based on a patch "Btrfs: do not

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: use btrfs_op instead of bio_op in __btrfs_map_block

On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 09:49:38AM +0900, Satoru Takeuchi wrote: > At Tue, 19 Sep 2017 17:50:09 -0600, > Liu Bo wrote: > > > > This seems to be a leftover of commit cf8cddd38bab ("btrfs: don't > > abuse REQ_OP_* flags for btrfs_map_block"). > > > > It should use btrfs_op() helper to provide one

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: use btrfs_op instead of bio_op in __btrfs_map_block

At Tue, 19 Sep 2017 17:50:09 -0600, Liu Bo wrote: > > This seems to be a leftover of commit cf8cddd38bab ("btrfs: don't > abuse REQ_OP_* flags for btrfs_map_block"). > > It should use btrfs_op() helper to provide one of 'enum btrfs_map_op' > types. > > Signed-off-by: Liu Bo

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: use self-explaining variable

On 2017年09月23日 07:36, Liu Bo wrote: This uses a bool 'do_backup' to help understand this piece of code. Signed-off-by: Liu Bo --- This is based on a patch "Btrfs: do not backup tree roots when fsync". fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1

[PATCH] Btrfs: use self-explaining variable

This uses a bool 'do_backup' to help understand this piece of code. Signed-off-by: Liu Bo --- This is based on a patch "Btrfs: do not backup tree roots when fsync". fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c

[PATCH v2] fstests: btrfs/150 regression test for reading compressed data

We had a bug in btrfs compression code which could end up with a kernel panic. This is adding a regression test for the bug and I've also sent a kernel patch to fix the bug. The patch is "Btrfs: fix kernel oops while reading compressed data". Signed-off-by: Liu Bo --- v2:

Re: defragmenting best practice?

Am Freitag, 22. September 2017, 13:22:52 CEST schrieb Austin S. Hemmelgarn: > > I'm not sure where Firefox puts its cache, I only use it on very rare > > occasions. But I think it's going to .cache/mozilla last time looked > > at it. > > I'm pretty sure that is correct. FWIW, on my system

Re: [PATCH] fstests: btrfs/150 regression test for reading compressed data

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 02:39:52PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 05:52:43PM -0600, Liu Bo wrote: > > We had a bug in btrfs compression code which could end up with a > > kernel panic. > > > > This is adding a regression test for the bug and I've also sent a > > kernel patch

Re: [PATCH] fstests: btrfs/150 regression test for reading compressed data

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 03:03:45PM +0800, Lu Fengqi wrote: > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 05:52:43PM -0600, Liu Bo wrote: > >We had a bug in btrfs compression code which could end up with a > >kernel panic. > > > >This is adding a regression test for the bug and I've also sent a > >kernel patch to fix

[PATCH] Btrfs: fix memory leak in raid56

The local bio_list may have pending bios when doing cleanup, it can end up with memory leak if they don't get free'd. Signed-off-by: Liu Bo --- fs/btrfs/raid56.c | 22 -- 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/raid56.c

[PATCH 1/3] btrfs: add a flag to iterate_inodes_from_logical to find all extent refs for uncompressed extents

The LOGICAL_INO ioctl provides a backward mapping from extent bytenr and offset (encoded as a single logical address) to a list of extent refs. LOGICAL_INO complements TREE_SEARCH, which provides the forward mapping (extent ref -> extent bytenr and offset, or logical address). These are useful

[PATCH 3/3] btrfs: increase output size for LOGICAL_INO_V2 ioctl

Build-server workloads have hundreds of references per file after dedup. Multiply by a few snapshots and we quickly exhaust the limit of 2730 references per extent that can fit into a 64K buffer. Raise the limit to 16M to be consistent with other btrfs ioctls (e.g. TREE_SEARCH_V2,

[PATCH 2/3] btrfs: add a flags argument to LOGICAL_INO and call it LOGICAL_INO_V2

Now that check_extent_in_eb()'s extent offset filter can be turned off, we need a way to do it from userspace. Add a 'flags' field to the btrfs_logical_ino_args structure to disable extent offset filtering, taking the place of one of the existing reserved[] fields. Previous versions of

[PATCH v3] btrfs: LOGICAL_INO enhancements

Changelog: v3-v2: - Stricter check on reserved[] field - now must be all zero, or userspace gets EINVAL. This prevents userspace from setting any of the reserved bits without the kernel providing an unambiguous interpretation of them, and doesn't require us to

Re: using fio to test btrfs compression

2017-09-22 8:33 GMT+03:00 shally verma : > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 5:26 PM, Timofey Titovets > wrote: >> 2017-09-20 14:10 GMT+03:00 shally verma : >>> Interesting part is I dont see "encoded" under flags. I couldn't

[josef-btrfs:new-kill-btree-inode 20/20] ERROR: "radix_tree_iter_tag_set" [fs/btrfs/btrfs.ko] undefined!

tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/josef/btrfs-next.git new-kill-btree-inode head: 3264d40ac916ca952f0b85e39304b9199ff36d8b commit: 3264d40ac916ca952f0b85e39304b9199ff36d8b [20/20] Btrfs: kill the btree_inode config: x86_64-randconfig-i0-201738 (attached as .config)

[josef-btrfs:new-kill-btree-inode 17/20] fs/ntfs/attrib.c:2549:35: error: implicit declaration of function 'inode_to_bdi'

tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/josef/btrfs-next.git new-kill-btree-inode head: 3264d40ac916ca952f0b85e39304b9199ff36d8b commit: a03edce0823e97312869c60933b37157c3b8866a [17/20] remove mapping from balance_dirty_pages*() config: x86_64-randconfig-x007-201738 (attached

Re: [PATCH v3 07/14] btrfs-progs: Doc/mkfs: Add extra condition for rootdir option

On 2017年09月22日 21:33, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: On 2017-09-22 08:32, Qu Wenruo wrote: On 2017年09月22日 19:38, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: On 2017-09-22 06:39, Qu Wenruo wrote: As I already stated in an other thread, if you want to shrink, do it in another command line tool. Do one thing and

Re: [PATCH v3 07/14] btrfs-progs: Doc/mkfs: Add extra condition for rootdir option

On 2017-09-22 08:32, Qu Wenruo wrote: On 2017年09月22日 19:38, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: On 2017-09-22 06:39, Qu Wenruo wrote: As I already stated in an other thread, if you want to shrink, do it in another command line tool. Do one thing and do it simple. (Although Btrfs itself is already out

Re: [PATCH v3 07/14] btrfs-progs: Doc/mkfs: Add extra condition for rootdir option

On 2017年09月22日 19:38, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: On 2017-09-22 06:39, Qu Wenruo wrote: As I already stated in an other thread, if you want to shrink, do it in another command line tool. Do one thing and do it simple. (Although Btrfs itself is already out of the UNIX way) Unless I'm reading

Re: [PATCH v3 07/14] btrfs-progs: Doc/mkfs: Add extra condition for rootdir option

On 2017-09-22 06:39, Qu Wenruo wrote: As I already stated in an other thread, if you want to shrink, do it in another command line tool. Do one thing and do it simple. (Although Btrfs itself is already out of the UNIX way) Unless I'm reading the code wrong, the shrinking isn't happening in a

Re: defragmenting best practice?

On 2017-09-21 16:10, Kai Krakow wrote: Am Wed, 20 Sep 2017 07:46:52 -0400 schrieb "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" : Fragmentation: Files with a lot of random writes can become heavily fragmented (1+ extents) causing excessive multi-second spikes of CPU load on systems

Re: [PATCH v3 07/14] btrfs-progs: Doc/mkfs: Add extra condition for rootdir option

As I already stated in an other thread, if you want to shrink, do it in another command line tool. Do one thing and do it simple. (Although Btrfs itself is already out of the UNIX way) It may be offline shrink/balance. But not to further complexing the --rootdir option now. And you also said

Re: [PATCH v3 07/14] btrfs-progs: Doc/mkfs: Add extra condition for rootdir option

+WARNING: Before v4.14 btrfs-progs, *--rootdir* will shrink the filesystem, +prevent user to make use of the remaining space. +In v4.14 btrfs-progs, this behavior is changed, and will not shrink the fs. +The result should be the same as `mkfs`, `mount` and then `cp -r`. + Hmm well. Shrink

Re: [PATCH 1/2] xfstests: Split MOUNT_OPTIONS to TEST_FS_MOUNT_OPTS and MOUNT_OPTIONS

On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 04:11:09PM +0800, Gu Jinxiang wrote: > Resovle the inconsistent of mount option. > Btrfs use MOUNT_OPTIONS for both scrath_dev and test_dev. Change to > MOUNT_OPTIONS for scratch mount, and TEST_FS_MOUNT_OPTS for test dev > mount. > > Signed-off-by: Gu Jinxiang

Re: Running compsize utility on btrfs compress mount point

shally verma posted on Fri, 22 Sep 2017 12:01:32 +0530 as excerpted: > In response to my question in another thread: >> Is there any command that i can run to confirm file has been compressed? > > I've gotten response from Duncan: >>>There is the quite recently posted (and actively updated since

Running compsize utility on btrfs compress mount point

Hi This email is in context of another thread initiated by me (with Subject: using fio to test btrfs compression). Just as brief background, I am trying to verify btrfs compression where I am writing data using fio, dd or cp command. In response to my question in another thread: > Is there any

Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] btrfs: introduce new btrfs_mount()

> (1) parse subvol id related options for later use in mount_subtree() > (3) return by calling mount_subtree() Sorry, this is not mount_subtree(), but mount_subvol(). Thanks, Tomohiro -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to

[PATCH v2 3/3] btrfs: introduce new btrfs_mount()

Introduce new btrfs_mount() using previous setups. This will do: (1) parse subvol id related options for later use in mount_subtree() (2) mount device's root by calling vfs_kern_mount() with btrfs_root_fs_type. As a result, mount_root() is called (3) return by calling mount_subtree() The