due to the semantics of btrfs_search_slot the path can point to an
invalid slot when ret 0. This condition went unnoticed, which in
turn could have led to an incomplete scrubbing.
Signed-off-by: Arne Jansen sensi...@gmx.net
---
Change in v2:
- fix return value of scrub_enumerate_chunks
On 08.06.2011 15:48, Josef Bacik wrote:
On 06/08/2011 04:38 AM, Arne Jansen wrote:
due to the semantics of btrfs_search_slot the path can point to an
invalid slot when ret 0. This condition went unnoticed, which in
turn could have led to an incomplete scrubbing.
Signed-off-by: Arne Jansen
On 08.06.2011 19:54, Chris Mason wrote:
Excerpts from Josef Bacik's message of 2011-06-08 09:25:57 -0400:
On 06/08/2011 04:58 AM, Arne Jansen wrote:
Hi Chris,
please pull from
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arne/btrfs-unstable-arne.git
for-chris
It contains the 2 commits
On 08.06.2011 20:45, Josef Bacik wrote:
Arne's scrub stuff exposed a problem with mapping the extent buffer in
reada_for_search. He searches the commit root with multiple threads and with
skip_locking set, so we can race and overwrite node-map_token since node
isn't
locked. So fix this so
With discard flag in btrfs_device, we will only push trim request to the
devices support that.
Now we don't return EOPNOTSUPP to the caller, so we won't trigger BUG_ONs
in the walk_log_tree functions if we mount a drive without DISCARD
using -o discard, but it is still possible if we get errors
When btrfs_start_transaction() fails, we should call btrfs_std_error()
properly for filesystem to readonly.
(in this patch, forced readonly framework is used)
Signed-off-by: Tsutomu Itoh t-i...@jp.fujitsu.com
---
fs/btrfs/file.c|1 +
fs/btrfs/inode.c | 34
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 04:44:09PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
--- a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
@@ -2932,6 +2932,8 @@ static int update_space_info(struct btrfs_fs_info
*info, u64 flags,
found-full = 0;
found-force_alloc = CHUNK_ALLOC_NO_FORCE;
list_splice_init will make delalloc_inodes empty, but without a spinlock
around, this may produce corrupted list head, accessed in many placess,
The race window is very tight and nobody seems to have hit it so far.
Signed-off-by: David Sterba dste...@suse.cz
---
fs/btrfs/disk-io.c |3 +--
1
On 06/09/2011 05:45 AM, David Sterba wrote:
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 04:44:09PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
--- a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
@@ -2932,6 +2932,8 @@ static int update_space_info(struct btrfs_fs_info
*info, u64 flags,
found-full = 0;
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 12:19 PM, Marek Otahal markota...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
the issue happens every time when i have to hard power-off my notebook
(suspend problems).
With kernel 2.6.39 the partition is unmountable, solution is to boot 2.6.38
kernel which
1/ is able to mount the
On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 06:38:52PM +0900, Tsutomu Itoh wrote:
When btrfs_start_transaction() fails, we should call btrfs_std_error()
properly for filesystem to readonly.
(in this patch, forced readonly framework is used)
Signed-off-by: Tsutomu Itoh t-i...@jp.fujitsu.com
---
Hi Chris,
On 04.05.2011 16:18, Jan Schmidt wrote:
When encountering an EIO while reading from a nodatasum extent, we
insert an error record into the inode's failure tree.
btrfs_readpage_end_io_hook returns early for nodatasum inodes. We'd
better clear the failure tree in that case, otherwise
Excerpts from Jan Schmidt's message of 2011-06-09 12:16:06 -0400:
Hi Chris,
On 04.05.2011 16:18, Jan Schmidt wrote:
When encountering an EIO while reading from a nodatasum extent, we
insert an error record into the inode's failure tree.
btrfs_readpage_end_io_hook returns early for
On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 10:00:42AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
We're not trying to be perfect here, we're trying to be fast :).
Be even faster with smp_rmb() :)
david
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
Hi Chris,
Can you pull this into the next -rc ? It's minor, but people think it's
useful. I just had another person asking about this patch.
Thanks,
Ilya
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a message to
Hi,
I've run into the following BUG on 3.0-rcX kernels when
running mkcephfs:
Jun 9 15:14:50 an1 [ 299.446615] [ cut here ]
Jun 9 15:14:50 an1 [ 299.447357] kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/ioctl.c:432!
Jun 9 15:14:50 an1 [ 299.447357] invalid opcode: [#1] SMP
Jun 9
I've observed several times that after a btrfs filesystem defrag a file was way
more fragmented than before. For example, a file that was recently written, had
10 extents (output from filefrag). After a defrag filefrag showed more than
1900
extents. For curiosity, a simple copy of this
Hi,
a candidate fix:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git;a=commit;h=aa0467d8d2a00e75b2bb6a56a4ee6d70c5d1928f
With Linus' tree, today's linux-next build (powercp ppc64_defconfig)
produced this warning:
fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c: In function
(2011/06/10 0:51), David Sterba wrote:
On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 06:38:52PM +0900, Tsutomu Itoh wrote:
When btrfs_start_transaction() fails, we should call btrfs_std_error()
properly for filesystem to readonly.
(in this patch, forced readonly framework is used)
Signed-off-by: Tsutomu Itoh
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 12:48:36AM +0200, Johannes Hirte wrote:
I've observed several times that after a btrfs filesystem defrag a file was
way
more fragmented than before. For example, a file that was recently written,
had
10 extents (output from filefrag). After a defrag filefrag showed
On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 03:28:09PM +0800, Li Dongyang wrote:
--- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.h
+++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.h
@@ -45,6 +45,7 @@ struct btrfs_device {
int running_pending;
u64 generation;
+ int discard;
can you pick a better name? this does not describe that it's the
Hi,
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 01:33:21PM -0400, James Cloos wrote:
The BUG_ON() call is from:
if (!BTRFS_I(inode)-orphan_meta_reserved) {
BTRFS_I(inode)-orphan_meta_reserved = 1;
reserve = 1;
}
/* *ELIDED* */
/* grab metadata
Hi,
is it possible to refresh this patchset and resend? I'd like to enroll
it and give it some review and testing. So far I have seen notions and
use of trans_mutex, which has been removed.
thanks,
david
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a
On 06/10/2011 08:40 AM, David Sterba wrote:
Hi,
is it possible to refresh this patchset and resend? I'd like to enroll
it and give it some review and testing. So far I have seen notions and
use of trans_mutex, which has been removed.
Sure, thanks for the passion.
Yea, I've noticed the
On 06/06/2011 06:19 AM, Marek Otahal wrote:
Hello,
the issue happens every time when i have to hard power-off my notebook (suspend
problems).
With kernel 2.6.39 the partition is unmountable, solution is to boot 2.6.38
kernel which
1/ is able to mount the partition,
2/ by doing that fixes the
On 10 June 2011 09:57, Andy Lutomirski l...@mit.edu wrote:
On 06/06/2011 06:19 AM, Marek Otahal wrote:
Hello,
the issue happens every time when i have to hard power-off my notebook
(suspend problems).
With kernel 2.6.39 the partition is unmountable, solution is to boot
2.6.38 kernel which
Hi,
On Thu, 9 Jun 2011 15:52:43 -0600, Jim Schutt wrote:
Jun 9 15:14:50 an1 [ 299.446615] [ cut here ]
Jun 9 15:14:50 an1 [ 299.447357] kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/ioctl.c:432!
Jun 9 15:14:50 an1 [ 299.447357] invalid opcode: [#1] SMP
Jun 9 15:14:50 an1 [
DS == David Sterba d...@jikos.cz writes:
DS confirmed, -ENOSPC == -28
So not a novel BUG_ON() after all.
On the plus side, it has not re-appeared in the 3.0 rc's.
That (4 Gig) fs currently has:
:; find /usr/local/portage|wc -l
444073
:; df /usr/local/portage
Filesystem 1K-blocksUsed
On Friday, June 10, 2011 08:00:17 AM David Sterba wrote:
On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 03:28:09PM +0800, Li Dongyang wrote:
--- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.h
+++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.h
@@ -45,6 +45,7 @@ struct btrfs_device {
int running_pending;
u64 generation;
+ int discard;
can you
29 matches
Mail list logo
