On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 10:15 PM, Sasha Levin sasha.le...@oracle.com
wrote:
Ping?
This BUG_ON()ing due to GFP_ATOMIC allocation failure is really silly
:(
Agreed, I have a patch for this in testing. It didn't make my first
pull but I'll get it fixed up.
-chris
--
To unsubscribe from
Hello,
I'm getting massive amounts of cpu soft lockups in Linus's tree for
today. This occurs almost immediately and is very reproducible in aim7
disk workloads using btrfs:
kernel:[ 559.800017] NMI watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#114 stuck for 22s!
[reaim:44435]
...
[ 999.800070] Modules
This hasn't landed in an btrfs-progs branch I found. Any update?
Marc
Am Dienstag, 23. September 2014, 16:34:54 schrieb Gui Hecheng:
When runing restore under lzo compression, bad compress length
problems are encountered.
It is because there is a page align problem with the @decompress_lzo,
These patches remove the use of VLAIS using a new SHASH_DESC_ON_STACK macro.
Some of the previously accepted VLAIS removal patches haven't used this
macro. I will
push new patches to consistently use this macro in all those older cases
for 3.19
The following changes since commit
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 10:06:16AM +0200, Marc Dietrich wrote:
This hasn't landed in an btrfs-progs branch I found. Any update?
I had it tagged for review and found something that needs fixing. The
PAGE_CACHE_SIZE is hardcoded to 4k, this will break on filesystems with
larger sectors (eg. the
Summarizing what I've seen on the threads...
First of all many thanks for summarizing the info.
1) The bug seems to be read-only snapshot related. The connection to
send is that send creates read-only snapshots, but people creating
read-
only snapshots for other purposes are now reporting
Hi,
Here's a simple raid1 recovery experiment that's not working as expected.
kernel: 3.17, latest mainline
progs: 3.16.1
I started with a simple raid1 mirror of 2 drives (sda and sdb). The
filesystem is functional, I created one subvol, put some data,
read/write tested etc..
yanked the sdb
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 10:48 AM, Suman C schakr...@gmail.com wrote:
The new drive shows up as sdb. btrfs fi show still prints drive missing.
mounted the filesystem with ro,degraded
tried adding the new sdb drive which results in the following error.
(-f because the new drive has a fs from
I cannot delete that way because it would mean going below the minimum
number of devices and it fails, as explained in the wiki.
The solution from wiki is to add a new device and then delete the old
one, but the problem here may be due to the new device appearing with
the same name(sdb)?
Suman
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In my openSUSE 13.1 system, I have / and /home on separate partitions
of a two disk btrfs raid1 array.
# btrfs fi sh
Label: system uuid: 0b07b829-9a0e-44ab-89ee-14b36a45199e
Total devices 2 FS bytes used 11.99GiB
devid1 size
On Tue, 2014-10-14 at 16:18 +0100, Bob Williams wrote:
When I run scrub on the root (system) partition now, I get
ERROR: scrub is already running.
To cancel use 'btrfs scrub cancel /'.
To see the status use 'btrfs scrub status [-d] /'.
but
# btrfs scrub cancel /
ERROR: scrub cancel
The corruption seems to be worse than expected. In kernel 3.16.5 I can
not mount this filesystem read/write.
I'm in progress of doing a tar - mkfs.btrfs - untar recovery and staying
on 3.16.5 for now.
[ 55.465584] parent transid verify failed on 51150848 wanted 272368
found 276401
[
Howdy,
So I run several gentoo systems and I upgraded two of them to kernel 3.17.0
One using BTRFS for root.
One using ext3 for root (via the ext4 driver)
_Both_ systems exhibited strange behavior (long pauses and then hangs
requiring hard-power) within several hours. Both then had random
I didn't notice a corruption on other filesystems with kernel 3.17.0.
Also I didn't experience any hangs except when trying to mount a
corrupted btrfs but this was causing a hang within less than 10 seconds.
It could be that your problem is unrelated and that the corruption you
are
use function defined in include/linux/highmem.h
Note that this reverts 2 last function call order
Signed-off-by: Fabian Frederick f...@skynet.be
---
fs/btrfs/scrub.c | 8 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/scrub.c b/fs/btrfs/scrub.c
index
On Oct 14, 2014, at 10:48 AM, Suman C schakr...@gmail.com wrote:
mounted the filesystem with ro,degraded
tried adding the new sdb drive which results in the following error.
(-f because the new drive has a fs from past)
# btrfs device add -f /dev/sdb /mnt2/raid1pool
/dev/sdb is mounted
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 07:46:14PM +0200, Fabian Frederick wrote:
use function defined in include/linux/highmem.h
Note that this reverts 2 last function call order
And adds a BUG_ON(PAGE_CACHE_SIZE PAGE_SIZE). We can take bets on
whether that will ever trigger.
- z
--
To unsubscribe from
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 14/10/14 17:25, Calvin Walton wrote:
On Tue, 2014-10-14 at 16:18 +0100, Bob Williams wrote:
When I run scrub on the root (system) partition now, I get
ERROR: scrub is already running. To cancel use 'btrfs scrub
cancel /'. To see the status
On 10/14/2014 10:22 AM, David Arendt wrote:
I didn't notice a corruption on other filesystems with kernel 3.17.0.
Also I didn't experience any hangs except when trying to mount a
corrupted btrfs but this was causing a hang within less than 10 seconds.
It could be that your problem is unrelated
After the reboot step, where I indicated that I mounted ro, I was
unable to mount rw or rw,degraded. I get the mount: wrong fs type,
bad option, bad superblock error if I try to mount it rw.
What might be the reason for that?
Suman
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 12:15 PM, Chris Murphy
On 14 October 2014 at 21:15 Zach Brown z...@zabbo.net wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 07:46:14PM +0200, Fabian Frederick wrote:
use function defined in include/linux/highmem.h
Note that this reverts 2 last function call order
And adds a BUG_ON(PAGE_CACHE_SIZE PAGE_SIZE). We can take
admin posted on Tue, 14 Oct 2014 13:17:41 +0200 as excerpted:
And if you're affected, be aware that until we have a fix, we don't
know if it'll be possible to remove the affected and currently
undeletable snapshots. If it's not, at some point you'll need to do a
fresh mkfs.btrfs, to get rid
Suman C posted on Tue, 14 Oct 2014 07:48:01 -0700 as excerpted:
Here's a simple raid1 recovery experiment that's not working as
expected.
kernel: 3.17, latest mainline progs: 3.16.1
I started with a simple raid1 mirror of 2 drives (sda and sdb). The
filesystem is functional, I created
On 10/14/2014 02:35 PM, Duncan wrote:
But at some point, presumably after a fix is in place, since the damaged
snapshots aren't currently always deletable, if the fix only prevents new
damage from occurring and doesn't provide a way to fix the damaged ones,
then mkfs would be the only way to do
I've got no idea if this is possible given the current storage layout,
but it would be Really Nice™ if there were a way to have a single
subvolume exist in more than one place in hirearchy. I know this can be
faked via mount tricks (bind or use of subvol=), but having it be a real
thing would
Robert White posted on Tue, 14 Oct 2014 09:54:51 -0700 as excerpted:
On the BTRFS system much of my browser settings for firefox were
trashed, particularly the cookies and saved conifigurations for add-ons
(like which sites had scripts enabled/disabled in no-script) etc.
FWIW, this reply is
Robert White posted on Tue, 14 Oct 2014 15:03:21 -0700 as excerpted:
What happens if btrfs property set is used to (attempt to) promote the
snapshot from read-only to read-write? Can the damaged snapshot then be
subjected to scrub of btrfsck?
e.g.
btrfs property set /path/to/snapshot ro
From what I can tell the status of a subvolume as a snapshot or not
is a persistent property that has exactly one effect... determining if
the subvolume is listed when using -s on btrfs subvol list. That is
the status as snapshot or not seems to be largely cosmetic.
It would be useful if that
Populate btrfs_check_super_valid() with checks that try to verify
consistency of superblock by additional conditions that may arise from
corrupted devices or bitflips. Some of tests are only hints and issue
warnings instead of failing the mount, basically when the checks are
derived from the data
Hi,
the 3.17 release is almost ready, I've updated the git repositories at
http://repo.or.cz/w/btrfs-progs-unstable/devel.git
https://github.com/kdave/btrfs-progs
tagged as 3.17-rc3 (7fd6d933528f30a). Please give it some testing, I'm about to
do a release in 1-2 days.
Among other fixes and
On 10/14/14 22:48, Suman C wrote:
Hi,
Here's a simple raid1 recovery experiment that's not working as expected.
kernel: 3.17, latest mainline
progs: 3.16.1
I started with a simple raid1 mirror of 2 drives (sda and sdb). The
filesystem is functional, I created one subvol, put some data,
31 matches
Mail list logo
