2017-10-28 1:40 GMT+03:00 Julien Muchembled :
> Hello,
>
> I have 2 disks in RAID1, each one having 2 partitions:
> - 1 for / (BtrFS)
> - 1 for /home (MD/XFS)
>
> For some reasons, 1 disk was removed and readded. I had no issue at readding
> it to the MD array, but for BtrFS, I had to reboot.
>
>
On 2017年10月28日 02:17, Hans van Kranenburg wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is a followup to my previous threads named "About free space
> fragmentation, metadata write amplification and (no)ssd" [0] and
> "Experiences with metadata balance/convert" [1], exploring how good or
> bad btrfs can handle filesyst
On 2017年10月28日 00:59, David Sterba wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 08:53:24AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>> New test case to test if the minimal device size given by "mkfs.btrfs"
>> failure case is valid.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
>> ---
>> tests/mkfs-tests/010-small-image/test.sh | 49
>> +
On 2017年10月28日 01:37, David Sterba wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 03:29:28PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>> This patchset adds quota support, which means the result fs will have
>> quota enabled by default, and its accounting is already consistent, no
>> manually rescan or quota enable is needed.
>
Hello,
I have 2 disks in RAID1, each one having 2 partitions:
- 1 for / (BtrFS)
- 1 for /home (MD/XFS)
For some reasons, 1 disk was removed and readded. I had no issue at readding it
to the MD array, but for BtrFS, I had to reboot.
Then, I tried to investigate more using qemu with systemrescuec
Hi Martin,
On 10/27/2017 10:10 PM, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
>> Q: How do I fight this and prevent getting into a situation where all
>> raw space is allocated, risking a filesystem crash?
>> A: Use btrfs balance to fight the symptoms. It reads data and writes it
>> out again without the free spac
Ok, it's time to start looking at the other half of the story... The
behavior of the metadata extent allocator.
Interesting questions here are:
Q: If I point btrfs balance at 1GiB of data, why does it need to write
40GiB to disk while only relocating this 1GiB amount? What's the other
39GiB o
Hello Hans,
Hans van Kranenburg - 27.10.17, 20:17:
> This is a followup to my previous threads named "About free space
> fragmentation, metadata write amplification and (no)ssd" [0] and
> "Experiences with metadata balance/convert" [1], exploring how good or
> bad btrfs can handle filesystems that
Hi,
This is a followup to my previous threads named "About free space
fragmentation, metadata write amplification and (no)ssd" [0] and
"Experiences with metadata balance/convert" [1], exploring how good or
bad btrfs can handle filesystems that are larger than your average
desktop computer and/or w
On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 03:29:28PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> This patchset adds quota support, which means the result fs will have
> quota enabled by default, and its accounting is already consistent, no
> manually rescan or quota enable is needed.
Great, thanks for working on that. I'm going to m
On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 08:53:24AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> New test case to test if the minimal device size given by "mkfs.btrfs"
> failure case is valid.
>
> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
> ---
> tests/mkfs-tests/010-small-image/test.sh | 49
>
> 1 file changed, 4
On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 08:53:23AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> Introduce a new function, run_mustfail_stdout(), which is similar to
> run_mustfail(), with extra output redirection.
> Also this new run_mustfail_stdout() doesn't set pipefail and use
> temporary file to catch the output.
> So it doesn't
On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 05:13:06PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> The patchset can be fetched from github:
> https://github.com/adam900710/btrfs-progs/tree/check_unaligned_dev
>
> There are several reports in mail list for btrfs device size related
> problems.
>
> 1) kernel refuse to mount some fs, du
On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 11:30:24AM +0530, Lakshmipathi.G wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Lakshmipathi.G
Applied, thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo
btrfs_read_dev_super() returns -1 / -EPERM upon not finding a suitable SB,
change that to return -ENOENT instead, which is much closer to the actual
possible errors.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain
---
v2: use -ENOENT instead of 1.
disk-io.c | 2 +-
utils.c | 2 +-
volumes.c | 2 +-
3 files changed
On 10/27/2017 04:04 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2017年10月27日 15:54, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
On 27.10.2017 10:31, Anand Jain wrote:
btrfs_read_dev_super() returns -1 upon not finding a suitable SB,
change that to return 1 instead, so that it can reserve the < 0
values for the errno communication
On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 03:28:48PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
> %fi_args.num_devices provides number of devices excluding the
> seed device. So when looping through the device list for a
> given fsid, determine if the given device is a seed device
> by reading its superblock and then skip it if its a
From: Filipe Manana
This implements support the zero range operation of fallocate. For now
at least it's as simple as possible while reusing most of the existing
fallocate and hole punching infrastructure.
Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana
---
V2: Removed double inode unlock on error path from fail
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 10:41:42AM +0900, Misono, Tomohiro wrote:
> This updates help/doc of "btrfs device remove".
>
> First patch adds the explanation that delete is the alias of remove to help
> message.
> Second patch adds the description of "remove missing", which is currently only
> written
From: Filipe Manana
This implements support the zero range operation of fallocate. For now
at least it's as simple as possible while reusing most of the existing
fallocate and hole punching infrastructure.
Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana
---
fs/btrfs/file.c | 333 +
On 2017年10月27日 15:54, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>
>
> On 27.10.2017 10:31, Anand Jain wrote:
>> btrfs_read_dev_super() returns -1 upon not finding a suitable SB,
>> change that to return 1 instead, so that it can reserve the < 0
>> values for the errno communications.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Anand Ja
On 27.10.2017 10:31, Anand Jain wrote:
> btrfs_read_dev_super() returns -1 upon not finding a suitable SB,
> change that to return 1 instead, so that it can reserve the < 0
> values for the errno communications.
>
> Signed-off-by: Anand Jain
I believe this is buggy since it will be masking err
btrfs_read_dev_super() returns -1 upon not finding a suitable SB,
change that to return 1 instead, so that it can reserve the < 0
values for the errno communications.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain
---
An independent patch, not related to any recent patch sent to ML.
disk-io.c | 2 +-
utils.c | 2
Allow repair_qgroups() to do silent repair, so it can acts as offline
qgroup rescan.
This provides the basis for later mkfs quota support.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
---
cmds-check.c| 2 +-
qgroup-verify.c | 19 +++
qgroup-verify.h | 2 +-
3 files changed, 13 insertions(+),
Only test if btrfs check (which will check qgroup by default) and kernel
mount success.
Comprehensive qgroup test cases still belongs to fstests.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
---
tests/mkfs-tests/001-basic-profiles/test.sh | 10 ++
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
diff --git a/tests/mkfs-t
Introduce new parameter, --enable-quota, to enable quota at mkfs time.
The result fs will has quota enabled, with consistent qgroup accounting.
This is quite handy to test quota with fstests, which doesn't support to
call ioctl for btrfs at mount time.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
---
Documentatio
Introduce a new function, btrfs_create_tree(), to create an empty tree.
Currently, there is only one caller to create new tree, namely
data reloc tree in mkfs.
However it's copying fs tree to create a new root.
This copy fs tree method is not a good idea if we only need an empty
tree.
So here in
The original qgroup-verify integrates qgroup classification into
report_qgroups().
This behavior makes silent qgroup repair (or offline rescan) impossible.
To repair qgroup, we must call report_qgroups() to trigger bad qgroup
classification, which will output error message.
This patch moves bad q
Introduce a new function, insert_qgroup_items(), to insert qgroup info
item and qgroup limit item for later mkfs qgroup support.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
---
mkfs/main.c | 34 ++
1 file changed, 34 insertions(+)
diff --git a/mkfs/main.c b/mkfs/main.c
index 1d7270
Current kernel only supports qgroup version 1.
Make qgroup-verify to follow this standard.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
---
ctree.h | 1 +
qgroup-verify.c | 2 ++
2 files changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/ctree.h b/ctree.h
index 22806599a744..506b76766579 100644
--- a/ctree.h
+++ b/ctre
This patchset adds quota support, which means the result fs will have
quota enabled by default, and its accounting is already consistent, no
manually rescan or quota enable is needed.
The overall design of such support is:
1) Create needed tree
Both btrfs_root and real root item and tree root l
In fact qgroup-verify is just kind of offline qgroup rescan, and later
mkfs qgroup support will reuse it.
So qgroup-verify doesn't really need to rely the global variable @repair
to check if it should repair qgroups.
Instead check fs_info->readonly to do the repair.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
---
%fi_args.num_devices provides number of devices excluding the
seed device. So when looping through the device list for a
given fsid, determine if the given device is a seed device
by reading its superblock and then skip it if its a seed device.
Reading of the superblock is done by the function dev_
33 matches
Mail list logo