On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 04:34:19PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> Add '-s ' option to show superblock at given bytenr.
>
> This is very useful to debug non-standard btrfs, like debuging the
> 1st stage btrfs of btrfs-convert.
>
> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
Applied, thanks.
--
On 11/02/2015 03:29 AM, Chandan Rajendra wrote:
When executing generic/001 in a loop on a ppc64 machine (with both sectorsize
and nodesize set to 64k), the following call trace is observed,
WARNING: at /root/repos/linux/fs/btrfs/locking.c:253
Modules linked in:
CPU: 2 PID: 8353 Comm: umount Not
2015-10-28 09:44 keltezéssel, Szalma László írta:
Ok, I had a chance to try some things.
1.: the error
md5sum xyz
md5sum: xyz: Input/output error
(no any errors in dmesg)
2.: mount -o remount,ro /mnt/x
(could not do, it is used)
mysql stop && mount -o remount,ro /mnt/x
problem persists: io
Add output for dev uuid for print_chunk().
Quite useful to debug temporary btrfs in btrfs-convert.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
---
print-tree.c | 8
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff --git a/print-tree.c b/print-tree.c
index 7ddf400..4d4c3a2 100644
---
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 07:25:10AM +0900, Neil Brown wrote:
>
> If you create a subvolume in btrfs and access it (by name) without
> mounting it, then the subvolume looks like a separate mount to some
> extent, returning a different st_dev to stat(), but it doesn't look like
> a separate mount in
There are two total_bytes in btrfs_add_to_fsid(), local variable
of total_bytes means fs_total_bytes, and device->total_bytes means
device's total_bytes.
And device's total_bytes in argument is named block_count in current
code.
This patch rename:
total_bytes -> fs_total_bytes
block_count ->
When do following command in a vm, whose disks are created by
qemu-img create -f raw 11 2.6G:
# mkfs.btrfs -f /dev/vdd /dev/vde /dev/vdf
# btrfs-show-super /dev/vdd /dev/vde /dev/vdf | grep dev_item.total_bytes
dev_item.total_bytes2791727104
dev_item.total_bytes2791729152
Add '-s ' option to show superblock at given bytenr.
This is very useful to debug non-standard btrfs, like debuging the
1st stage btrfs of btrfs-convert.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
---
Documentation/btrfs-show-super.asciidoc | 5 +
btrfs-show-super.c
When executing generic/001 in a loop on a ppc64 machine (with both sectorsize
and nodesize set to 64k), the following call trace is observed,
WARNING: at /root/repos/linux/fs/btrfs/locking.c:253
Modules linked in:
CPU: 2 PID: 8353 Comm: umount Not tainted 4.3.0-rc5-13676-ga5e681d #54
task:
On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 01:59:46PM +0530, Chandan Rajendra wrote:
> When executing generic/001 in a loop on a ppc64 machine (with both sectorsize
> and nodesize set to 64k), the following call trace is observed,
Thanks Chandan, I hit this same trace on x86-64 with 16K nodes.
-chris
--
To
On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 03:50:12PM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 07:25:10AM +0900, Neil Brown wrote:
> >
> > If you create a subvolume in btrfs and access it (by name) without
> > mounting it, then the subvolume looks like a separate mount to some
> > extent, returning a
Dont call WARN_ON for ENOSPC error unless ENOSPC_DEBUG is enabled.
Signed-off-by : Ashish Samant
---
fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c | 6 +-
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c b/fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c
index
On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 12:32:57PM +, fdman...@kernel.org wrote:
> From: Filipe Manana
>
> Test that a file fsync works after punching a hole for the same file
> range multiple times, and that after log/journal replay the file's
> content and layout are correct.
>
> This
David Sterba posted on Mon, 02 Nov 2015 16:14:53 +0100 as excerpted:
> the kernel 4.3 was released yesterday, the btrfs-progs will follow at
> the end of this week. I've tagged an rc1 from current devel branch.
> There are a lots of small invisible changes and one change in the
> defaults:
>
> *
On Tue, Nov 03 2015, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 03:50:12PM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 07:25:10AM +0900, Neil Brown wrote:
>> >
>> > If you create a subvolume in btrfs and access it (by name) without
>> > mounting it, then the subvolume looks like a
During an rsync, 20TB unallocated space. Currently, no snapshots.
Should I try 4.1.12, or 4.3?
dmesg:
[122014.436612] BTRFS: error (device sde) in
btrfs_run_delayed_refs:2781: errno=-28 No space left
[122014.436615] BTRFS info (device sde): forced readonly
[122014.436624] BTRFS: error (device sde)
Hi,
the kernel 4.3 was released yesterday, the btrfs-progs will follow at the end
of this week. I've tagged an rc1 from current devel branch. There are a lots of
small invisible changes and one change in the defaults:
* mkfs: mixed mode is not forced anymore for devices smaller than 1 GiB
I've
From: Filipe Manana
Test that a file fsync works after punching a hole for the same file
range multiple times, and that after log/journal replay the file's
content and layout are correct.
This test is motivated by a bug found in btrfs, which is fixed by
the following linux
From: Filipe Manana
When we are using the no-holes feature, if we punch a hole into a file
range that already contains a hole which overlaps the range we are passing
to fallocate(), we end up removing the extent map that represents the
existing hole without adding a new one.
Hi everyone,
I have noticed the following in the log. The system continues to run,
but I am not sure for how long it will be stable.
# uname -a
Linux Debian 4.2.3-2~bpo8+1 (2015-10-20) i686 GNU/Linux
# mount | grep /var
/dev/sdd2 on /var type btrfs
On 2015-11-01 09:33, Ken Long wrote:
> I get a similar read-only status when I try to remove the drive from the
> array..
>
> Too bad the utility's function can not be slowed down.. to avoid
> triggering this error... ?
>
Actually, there are a couple of ways you could do this. The most
Hi
No, I never figured this out... After a while of waiting for answers I
just started over and took the data from my backup.
> Did you try removing the bad drive and did the system keep crashing anyway?
As you can see in my first mail the drive was already removed when
this error started to
22 matches
Mail list logo