Re: [RFC PATCH] btrfs/066: Fix race condition by making 'subvolume stress' task to exit gracefully

On Thursday 17 Mar 2016 15:23:39 Eryu Guan wrote: > A named pipe seems too heavy and complicated to me. How about breaking > out the loop in _btrfs_stress_subvolume on the existence of some file? > e.g. > > _btrfs_stress_subvolume(): > ... > local stop_file=$5 > while [ ! -e

recovery problem raid5

Hello all, I give up for this problem at restore my data # uname -a Linux jarvis.home 4.5.0-1.el7.elrepo.x86_64 # btrfs --version btrfs-progs v3.19.1 # btrfs fi show warning, device 4 is missing bytenr mismatch, want=21020672, have=21217280 Couldn't read chunk root Label: none uuid:

qgroup code slowing down rebalance

I have a medium-sized multi-device btrfs filesystem (4 disks, 16TB total) running under 4.5.0-rc5. I recently added a disk and needed to rebalance. I started a rebalance operation three days ago. It was on the order of 20% done after those three days. :) During this rebalance, the disks were

Re: unable to mount btrfs partition, please help :(

Patrick Tschackert posted on Sat, 19 Mar 2016 23:15:33 +0100 as excerpted: > I'm growing increasingly desperate, can anyone help me? No need to be desperate. As the sysadmin's rule of backups states, simple form, you either have at least one level of backup, or you are by your (in)action

Re: unable to mount btrfs partition, please help :(

On 19 March 2016 at 21:34, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 5:35 PM, Patrick Tschackert > wrote: $ uname -a Linux vmhost 3.16.0-4-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 3.16.7-ckt20-1+deb8u4 (2016-02-29) x86_64 GNU/Linux >>>This is old. You

Re: unable to mount btrfs partition, please help :(

On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 5:35 PM, Patrick Tschackert wrote: > Hi Chris, > > thank you for answering so quickly! > >> Try 'btrfs check' without any options first. > $ btrfs check /dev/mapper/storage > checksum verify failed on 36340960788480 found 8F8E1006 wanted 4AA1BC89 >

[PATCH v2] btrfs-progs: add stat check in open_ctree_fs_info

Currently, open_ctree_fs_info will open whatever path you pass it and try to interpret it as a BTRFS filesystem. While this is not nessecarily dangerous (except possibly if done on a character device), it does result in some rather cryptic and non-sensical error messages when trying to run

btrfs replace status over 100%

Hi all I had to replace an 10TiB disk. The replacing works well, but the status shows me values over 100%! btrfs replace status -1 /export/backup/group/dphys 209.5% done, 0 write errs, 0 uncorr. read errs I use btrfs-progs version 4.0.1 (master) from

Re: [PATCH] btrfs: rename save_error_info to set_fs_error

On 03/16/2016 06:05 PM, David Sterba wrote: On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 04:43:05PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: @@ -171,7 +171,7 @@ void __btrfs_std_error(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, const char *function, #endif /* Don't go through full error handling during mount */ -

Mounting RAID1 degraded+rw only works once

Hello, I'm trying to understand how to correctly handle and recover from degraded RAID1 setups in btrfs. In particular, I don't understand a behavior I'm seeing which somehow takes part of the advantage away from the idea of having a RAID for me. The main issue I have is as follows. I can

Re: Mounting RAID1 degraded+rw only works once

In particular, I don't understand a behavior I'm seeing which somehow takes part of the advantage away from the idea of having a RAID for me. Yep. Very true. I am trying fix them. Generally, a storage/volume-manager need to match the Enterprise storage data center requirements, and I do

Re: Mounting RAID1 degraded+rw only works once

Anand Jain wrote on 2016/03/17 09:58 +0800: In particular, I don't understand a behavior I'm seeing which somehow takes part of the advantage away from the idea of having a RAID for me. Yep. Very true. I am trying fix them. Generally, a storage/volume-manager need to match the

Re: The *right* algorithm for determining the amount of free space

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 06:58:02PM +0100, David Sterba wrote: > On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 10:17:03PM +, Hugo Mills wrote: > >I know I promised this a while ago and didn't get round to it, but > > Henk's tinkering reminded me of it. I note specifically that the > > algorithm used to give the

Re: unable to mount btrfs partition, please help :(

Hi Chris, thank you for answering so quickly! > Try 'btrfs check' without any options first. $ btrfs check /dev/mapper/storage checksum verify failed on 36340960788480 found 8F8E1006 wanted 4AA1BC89 checksum verify failed on 36340960788480 found 8F8E1006 wanted 4AA1BC89 bytenr mismatch,

Re: unable to mount btrfs partition, please help :(

On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 4:15 PM, Patrick Tschackert wrote: > I'm growing increasingly desperate, can anyone help me? I'm thinking > of trying one or more of the following, but would like an informed > opinion: > 1) btrfs check --fix-crc > 2) btrfs-check --init-csum-tree > 3)

moving btrfs subvolumes to new disk

I'm having quite the time trying to move my current Gentoo install to an SSD. I first attempted Clonezilla, but that failed while cloning the btrfs partition. I then realized I could use btrfs send/receive. The partition has 2 subvolumes ROOT and ROOT/home. ROOT snapshots and sends without hitch,

Re: [PATCH] btrfs: rename save_error_info to set_fs_error

On 03/16/2016 11:49 PM, David Sterba wrote: On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 09:42:11PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: On 03/16/2016 06:05 PM, David Sterba wrote: On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 04:43:05PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: @@ -171,7 +171,7 @@ void __btrfs_std_error(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, const

Re: [PATCH] btrfs: Simplify conditions about compress while mapping btrfs flags to inode flags

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 09:09:59AM +0900, Satoru Takeuchi wrote: > Signed-off-by: Satoru Takeuchi Reviewed-by: David Sterba -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to

unable to mount btrfs partition, please help :(

Hi, Apologies if this eMail reaches the mailing list multiple times, i can't seem to get throught to the mailing list, so I'm sending it through a different account now... I'm having problems mounting my BTRFS filesystem. Here's what happened: My BTRFS filesystem sits in an encrypted

Btrfs progs pre-release 4.5-rc1

Hi, btrfs-progs 4.5-rc1 have been released. The ETA for final release is this Friday, so please test and report if you find problems. Small fixes or documentation updates are welcome. Changes: * new/moved commands * btrfs-show-super -> btrfs inspect-internal dump-super * btrfs-debug-tree ->

Re: [PATCH] btrfs-progs: add stat check in open_ctree_fs_info

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 07:17:21AM -0400, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: > >>> This one seems to be too restrict. > >>> > >>> I prefer to block char/pipe/dir and some other obvious wrong ones other > >>> than only allowing regular and block ones. > >> Running against a directory gives a cryptic error

Re: [PATCH v2 RESEND] btrfs: maintain consistency in logging to help debugging

On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 12:22:58PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: > Optional Label may or may not be set, or it might be set at some time > later. However while debugging to search through the kernel logs the > scripts would need the logs to be consistent, so logs search key words > shouldn't depend on

Re: [4.4.1] btrfs-transacti frequent high CPU usage despite little fragmentation

Duncan, thanks again for your effort, I highly appreciate it. On 19.03.2016 00:06, Duncan wrote: > autodefrag Got it, thanks. > Nocow interacts with snapshots. Thanks for presenting that in that much detail. > What can happen then, and used to happen frequently before 3.17, tho much >

[PATCH 1/5] btrfs-progs: "sub get-default" doesn't work

On 2016/03/17 3:29, David Sterba wrote: Hi, btrfs-progs 4.5-rc1 have been released. The ETA for final release is this Friday, so please test and report if you find problems. Small fixes or documentation updates are welcome. Please apply this patchset. Especially [1/5]~[4/5] fix the

[PATCH] btrfs-progs: fix incorrect column order

Signed-off-by: Alexander Fougner --- cmds-fi-du.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/cmds-fi-du.c b/cmds-fi-du.c index 6f3ef3d..2ffd917 100644 --- a/cmds-fi-du.c +++ b/cmds-fi-du.c @@ -505,8 +505,8 @@ static int du_add_file(const char

Re: [PATCH v2] btrfs-progs: subvolume functions reorg

On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:14:33PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: > Makes few subvol related functions usable outside of subvol > command set. > > This is a preparatory patch for encryption support. The changes > here are: > > Created new file subvolume.c > Created btrfs_get_subvol_info() from parts

Re: [PATCH v2 RESEND] btrfs: maintain consistency in logging to help debugging

On 03/17/2016 12:18 AM, David Sterba wrote: On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 12:22:58PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: Optional Label may or may not be set, or it might be set at some time later. However while debugging to search through the kernel logs the scripts would need the logs to be consistent, so

Re: [PATCH v2] btrfs-progs: subvolume functions reorg

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 04:54:24PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: > > > On 03/17/2016 10:19 PM, David Sterba wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:14:33PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: > >> Makes few subvol related functions usable outside of subvol > >> command set. > >> > >> This is a preparatory patch

Re: Snapshots slowing system

On 03/18/2016 09:17 AM, Duncan wrote: > So bottom line regarding that smartctl output, yeah, a new device is > probably a very good idea at this point. Those smart attributes indicate > either head slop or spin wobble, and some errors and command timeouts and > retries, which could well

Fwd: Snapshots slowing system

> Not sure if there is much else to do about fragmentation apart from running a > balance which would probally make thje machine v sluggish for a day or so. I think a full balance-run makes in this point of view no sense. A weekly freeing of unused and summarize of underused blocks make more

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs-progs: use btrfs-debugfs to fetch block group information

On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 08:59:26PM -0700, Liu Bo wrote: > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:36:49AM +0100, David Sterba wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 12:10:22PM -0800, Liu Bo wrote: > > > This aims to decide whether a balance can reduce the number of > > > data block groups and if it is, this shows

re: Btrfs: fix up read_tree_block to return proper error

Hello Liu Bo, The patch 64c043de466d: "Btrfs: fix up read_tree_block to return proper error" from May 25, 2015, leads to the following static checker warning: fs/btrfs/relocation.c:1858 replace_path() error: 'eb' dereferencing possible ERR_PTR() fs/btrfs/relocation.c 1850

Re: Snapshots slowing system

Pete posted on Thu, 17 Mar 2016 21:08:23 + as excerpted: > Hmm. Comments on ssd s set me googling. Don't normally touch smartctl > > root@phoenix:~# smartctl --attributes /dev/sdc > > 184 End-to-End_Error0x0032 098 098 099Old_age Always > FAILING_NOW 2 > > 1

Re: [PATCH v2] btrfs-progs: add stat check in open_ctree_fs_info

On 2016-03-18 11:17, David Sterba wrote: On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 10:03:42AM -0400, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: This has been both build and runtime tested on an x86-64 system with glibc. It has been build but not runtime tested with uClibc on x86-64 and ARMv7. It has not been tested on

Re: [PATCH v2] fstest: btrfs: test single 4k extent after subpagesize buffered writes

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:24:35PM +0800, Eryu Guan wrote: > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 09:13:57PM -0700, Liu Bo wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 02:39:41PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 04:27:59PM -0800, Liu Bo wrote: > > > > This is to test if COW enabled btrfs can end

Re: [PATCH v2] btrfs-progs: add stat check in open_ctree_fs_info

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 10:03:42AM -0400, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: > Currently, open_ctree_fs_info will open whatever path you pass it and try > to interpret it as a BTRFS filesystem. While this is not nessecarily > dangerous (except possibly if done on a character device), it does > result in

Re: btrfs receive hangs in "uninterruptible sleep"

Marko Schütz Schmuck posted on Thu, 17 Mar 2016 15:21:47 -0400 as excerpted: > for backup purposes on a laptop I use a shell script that takes > snapshots and then btrfs sends the increment to a btrfs receive to an > external USB drive. This used to work for years. The last time I used it >

Re: [PATCH v2] btrfs: remove save_error_info()

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:38:57AM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: > Actually save_error_info() sets the FS state to error > and nothing else. Further the word save doesn't induce > caffeine when compared to the word set in what actually > it does. > > So to make it better understandable move

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs-progs: use btrfs-debugfs to fetch block group information

On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:36:49AM +0100, David Sterba wrote: > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 12:10:22PM -0800, Liu Bo wrote: > > From: liub.li...@gmail.com > > > > This aims to decide whether a balance can reduce the number of > > data block groups and if it is, this

Re: Stupid (?) Idea about extent lifetimes.

Robert White posted on Tue, 15 Mar 2016 23:32:05 -0700 as excerpted: > It occurs to me that it would be desirable to mark extents as "least > favoured nations" and so all new writes would like to not be written > there and any data written there would have a desire to be somewhere > else. I

btrfs receive hangs in "uninterruptible sleep"

Dear All, for backup purposes on a laptop I use a shell script that takes snapshots and then btrfs sends the increment to a btrfs receive to an external USB drive. This used to work for years. The last time I used it successfully was mid-January. After that I have not been able to do a successful

Re: [PATCH] btrfs-progs: add stat check in open_ctree_fs_info

Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote on 2016/03/17 07:22 -0400: On 2016-03-17 05:04, Qu Wenruo wrote: Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote on 2016/03/16 11:26 -0400: Currently, open_ctree_fs_info will open whatever path you pass it and try to interpret it as a BTRFS filesystem. While this is not nessecarily

[RFC PATCH] btrfs/066: Fix race condition by making 'subvolume stress' task to exit gracefully

The following scenario can occur when running btrfs/066, Task ATask B Task C run_test() - Execute _btrfs_stress_subvolume() in a background shell. _btrfs_stress_subvolme()

Re: Global hotspare functionality

Issue 5: Race between close_ctree() and casualty_kthread(): close_ctree(): if (fs_info->casualty_kthread) kthread_stop(fs_info->casualty_kthread); casualty_kthread(): out: fs_info->casualty_kthread = NULL; At SMP system, kthread_stop() argument can be changed

Re: [PATCH v2] fstest: btrfs: test single 4k extent after subpagesize buffered writes

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 08:07:15AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 09:13:57PM -0700, Liu Bo wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 02:39:41PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 04:27:59PM -0800, Liu Bo wrote: > > > > This is to test if COW enabled btrfs can

Re: recovery problem raid5

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Hugo Mills wrote: >>The main thing you haven't tried here is mount -o degraded, which >> is the thing to do if you have a missing device in your array. >> >>

Re: Major HDD performance degradation on btrfs receive

Nazar Mokrynskyi posted on Wed, 16 Mar 2016 05:37:02 +0200 as excerpted: > I'm not sure what you mean exactly by searching. My first SSD died > during waking up from suspend mode, it worked perfectly till last > moment. It was not used for critical data at that time, but now I > understand

Re: parent transid verify failed on snapshot deletion

On Sun, 13 Mar 2016 15:52:52 -0600 Chris Murphy wrote: > I really think you need a minute's worth of kernel messages prior to > that time stamp. There was no messages a minute, or even (from memory) many hours prior to the crash. If there was something even remotely

Re: qgroup code slowing down rebalance

Dave Hansen wrote on 2016/03/17 09:36 -0700: On 03/16/2016 06:36 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote: Dave Hansen wrote on 2016/03/16 13:53 -0700: I have a medium-sized multi-device btrfs filesystem (4 disks, 16TB total) running under 4.5.0-rc5. I recently added a disk and needed to rebalance. I started a

Re: qgroup code slowing down rebalance

On 03/17/2016 06:02 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote: > Dave Hansen wrote on 2016/03/17 09:36 -0700: >> On 03/16/2016 06:36 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote: >>> Dave Hansen wrote on 2016/03/16 13:53 -0700: I have a medium-sized multi-device btrfs filesystem (4 disks, 16TB total) running under 4.5.0-rc5. I

Re: btrfs receive hangs in "uninterruptible sleep"

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 1:21 PM, Marko Schütz Schmuck wrote: > Dear All, > > for backup purposes on a laptop I use a shell script that takes > snapshots and then btrfs sends the increment to a btrfs receive to an > external USB drive. This used to work for years. Ok it's

Re: Blocks changed since previous snapshot of subvolume

sri yahoo.co.in> writes: > > Hi, > > I Would like to know between 2 snapshots of a subvolume, can we identify > what all blocks modified particular to that subvolume ? > > there can be many subvolume and snapshots present on the btrfs but i want > only blocks modified since first snapshot

RE: RE

Please confirm receipt of my previous mail..When can i call you -- 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-info.html

Re: Btrfsck memory usage reduce idea

On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 04:46:41PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > 1. Could you tell me what you'd like to do? > > > > a) Provide completely the same function with current > >implementation by other, more efficient way. > > Same function, but less efficient. > It may takes longer time,

Re: The *right* algorithm for determining the amount of free space

On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 10:17:03PM +, Hugo Mills wrote: >I know I promised this a while ago and didn't get round to it, but > Henk's tinkering reminded me of it. I note specifically that the > algorithm used to give the free space to plain old df gives incorrect > results -- probably

[PATCH 5/5] btrfs-progs: qgroup assign can't handle --no-rescan option

* actual result == # btrfs qgroup assign --no-rescan 0/260 1/261 /btrfs btrfs qgroup assign: unrecognized option '--no-rescan' usage: btrfs qgroup assign [options] Assign SRC as the child qgroup of DST --rescan

Re: [PATCH v2] fstest: btrfs: test single 4k extent after subpagesize buffered writes

On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 09:13:57PM -0700, Liu Bo wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 02:39:41PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 04:27:59PM -0800, Liu Bo wrote: > > > This is to test if COW enabled btrfs can end up with single 4k extents > > > when doing subpagesize buffered

Re: Major HDD performance degradation on btrfs receive

But seriously, what are you doing that you can't lose more than 15 minutes of? Couldn't it be even 20 minutes, or a half-hour or an hour with 15 minute snapshots only on the ssds (yes, I know the raid0 factor, but the question still applies)? This is artificial psychological limit. Sometimes

Re: qgroup code slowing down rebalance

Dave Hansen wrote on 2016/03/16 13:53 -0700: I have a medium-sized multi-device btrfs filesystem (4 disks, 16TB total) running under 4.5.0-rc5. I recently added a disk and needed to rebalance. I started a rebalance operation three days ago. It was on the order of 20% done after those three

Re: Snapshots slowing system

On 2016-03-18 14:16, Pete wrote: On 03/18/2016 09:17 AM, Duncan wrote: So bottom line regarding that smartctl output, yeah, a new device is probably a very good idea at this point. Those smart attributes indicate either head slop or spin wobble, and some errors and command timeouts and

Re: task btrfs-cleaner:770 blocked for more than 120 seconds.

2016-03-16 14:01 GMT+05:00 Roman Mamedov : > On Tue, 15 Mar 2016 09:18:14 +0500 > Mikhail Gavrilov wrote: > >> Yesterday btrfs again hangs on kernel 4.4.5 >> It's the same or another problem? > > Seems different to me, as there's also defrag

Re: [PATCH] btrfs-progs: add stat check in open_ctree_fs_info

Austin S. Hemmelgarn posted on Wed, 16 Mar 2016 11:26:11 -0400 as excerpted: > Currently, open_ctree_fs_info will open whatever path you pass it and > try to interpret it as a BTRFS filesystem. While this is not > nessecarily dangerous (except possibly if done on a character device), > it does

Re: recovery problem raid5

Hugo Mills posted on Fri, 18 Mar 2016 18:02:07 + as excerpted: > Also, that kernel's not really all that good for a parity RAID > array -- it's the very first one that had the scrub and replace > implementation, so it's rather less stable with parity RAID than the > later 4.x kernels. That's

Re: Blocks changed since previous snapshot of subvolume

Henk Slager gmail.com> writes: > > sri yahoo.co.in> writes: > > > > > Hi, > > > > I Would like to know between 2 snapshots of a subvolume, can we identify > > what all blocks modified particular to that subvolume ? > > > > there can be many subvolume and snapshots present on the btrfs

Re: [PATCH v2] fstest: btrfs: test single 4k extent after subpagesize buffered writes

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 02:39:41PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 04:27:59PM -0800, Liu Bo wrote: > > This is to test if COW enabled btrfs can end up with single 4k extents > > when doing subpagesize buffered writes. > > > > Signed-off-by: Liu Bo > >

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: fix performance regression of writing to prealloc/nocow file

On Thu, 17 Mar 2016 15:16:15 -0700 Liu Bo wrote: > For nocow/prealloc files, we try our best to not allocate space, however, > this ends up a huge performance regression since it's expensive to check > if data is shared. > > Let's go back to only go check shared data once

Re: qgroup code slowing down rebalance

On 03/16/2016 06:36 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote: > Dave Hansen wrote on 2016/03/16 13:53 -0700: >> I have a medium-sized multi-device btrfs filesystem (4 disks, 16TB >> total) running under 4.5.0-rc5. I recently added a disk and needed to >> rebalance. I started a rebalance operation three days ago. It

Re: [PATCH] btrfs: rename save_error_info to set_fs_error

On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 09:42:11PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: > On 03/16/2016 06:05 PM, David Sterba wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 04:43:05PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: > >> @@ -171,7 +171,7 @@ void __btrfs_std_error(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, > >> const char *function, > >> #endif > >> >

[PATCH v2] btrfs: remove save_error_info()

Actually save_error_info() sets the FS state to error and nothing else. Further the word save doesn't induce caffeine when compared to the word set in what actually it does. So to make it better understandable move save_error_info() code to its only consumer itself. Signed-off-by: Anand Jain

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: Improve FL_KEEP_SIZE handling in fallocate.

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 10:16:46AM -0700, Davide Italiano wrote: > On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 10:45 AM, Davide Italiano > wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 7:08 AM, David Sterba wrote: > >> On Mon, Apr 06, 2015 at 10:09:15PM -0700, Davide Italiano wrote: >

Re: [PATCH] btrfs-progs: add stat check in open_ctree_fs_info

On 2016-03-17 04:58, Duncan wrote: Austin S. Hemmelgarn posted on Wed, 16 Mar 2016 11:26:11 -0400 as excerpted: Currently, open_ctree_fs_info will open whatever path you pass it and try to interpret it as a BTRFS filesystem. While this is not nessecarily dangerous (except possibly if done on

Re: [PATCH v2] btrfs-progs: subvolume functions reorg

On 03/17/2016 10:19 PM, David Sterba wrote: On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:14:33PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: Makes few subvol related functions usable outside of subvol command set. This is a preparatory patch for encryption support. The changes here are: Created new file subvolume.c Created

Re: Incompat features: raid56 ... when creating a RAID6?

Andreas Grosse posted on Wed, 16 Mar 2016 10:12:47 +0100 as excerpted: > Am Mittwoch, 16. MÀrz 2016, 08:52:52 CET schrieb Anand Jain: >> Yes looks like. As it was there when I read your posting. >> >> >> >>> AndiN‹§²Êìrž›yúÚšØb²X¬¶Ç§vØ^–)Þº {.nÇ+‰·¥Š

Re: Snapshots slowing system

On 03/16/2016 11:39 AM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: >> I thought though that btrfs fi defrag would only defrag the one >> file or directory? > It does, it's just not recursive unless you tell it to be. Hmm. That shows when I last used it. Last time I used it the '-r' option did not exist. So

[PATCH] btrfs-progs: subvol sync: fix memory corruption, undersized array

The subvol sync command crashed randomly at the end with *** glibc detected *** btrfs: double free or corruption (out): 0x006ab040 *** This is caused by running out of the ids array in case there are more than 128 subvolumes. The array is increased in steps but does not account the size

Re: [PATCH v2] btrfs-progs: add stat check in open_ctree_fs_info

On 2016-03-18 11:17, David Sterba wrote: On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 10:03:42AM -0400, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: There are other tools that have similarly poor error behavior when called incorrectly (btrfs rescue immediately comes to mind), but they don't use open_ctree_fs_info, so this doesn't

Re: [PATCH 1/5] btrfs-progs: "sub get-default" doesn't work

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 10:26:15AM +0900, Satoru Takeuchi wrote: > On 2016/03/17 3:29, David Sterba wrote: > > btrfs-progs 4.5-rc1 have been released. The ETA for final release is this > > Friday, so please test and report if you find problems. Small fixes or > > documentation updates are welcome.

[PATCH v2] fstest: btrfs: test single 4k extent after subpagesize buffered writes

This is to test if COW enabled btrfs can end up with single 4k extents when doing subpagesize buffered writes. The patch to fix the problem is https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8527991/ Signed-off-by: Liu Bo --- v2: - Teach awk to know system's pagesize. - Add

Re: [PATCH] btrfs-progs: add stat check in open_ctree_fs_info

On 2016-03-17 20:38, Qu Wenruo wrote: Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote on 2016/03/17 07:22 -0400: On 2016-03-17 05:04, Qu Wenruo wrote: Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote on 2016/03/16 11:26 -0400: Currently, open_ctree_fs_info will open whatever path you pass it and try to interpret it as a BTRFS

Re: recovery problem raid5

W dniu 2016-03-19 o 00:40, Chris Murphy pisze: On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Hugo Mills wrote: The main thing you haven't tried here is mount -o degraded, which is the thing to do if

Re: [PATCH v2] fstest: btrfs: test single 4k extent after subpagesize buffered writes

On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 09:13:57PM -0700, Liu Bo wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 02:39:41PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 04:27:59PM -0800, Liu Bo wrote: > > > This is to test if COW enabled btrfs can end up with single 4k extents > > > when doing subpagesize buffered

Re: [PATCH] btrfs-progs: add stat check in open_ctree_fs_info

On 2016-03-17 05:04, Qu Wenruo wrote: Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote on 2016/03/16 11:26 -0400: Currently, open_ctree_fs_info will open whatever path you pass it and try to interpret it as a BTRFS filesystem. While this is not nessecarily dangerous (except possibly if done on a character

Re: [PATCH V2 RESEND] btrfs: pass the error code to the btrfs_std_error and log ret

On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 12:22:15PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: > This patch will log return value of add/del_qgroup_relation() and pass the > err code of btrfs_run_qgroups to the btrfs_std_error(). > > Signed-off-by: Anand Jain > --- > v2: fix the forgotten git commit amend,

Re: Snapshots slowing system

On 2016-03-18 05:17, Duncan wrote: Pete posted on Thu, 17 Mar 2016 21:08:23 + as excerpted: 5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0033 100 100 010Pre-fail Always - 0 This one is available on ssds and spinning rust, and while it never actually hit failure mode for me on an

re: Btrfs: get/set for struct header fields

Hello Chris Mason, The patch 7518a238ea01: "Btrfs: get/set for struct header fields" from Mar 12, 2007, leads to the following static checker warning: fs/btrfs/print-tree.c:359 btrfs_print_tree() error: 'next' dereferencing possible ERR_PTR() fs/btrfs/print-tree.c 355

[PATCH v2] btrfs-progs: subvolume functions reorg

Makes few subvol related functions usable outside of subvol command set. This is a preparatory patch for encryption support. The changes here are: Created new file subvolume.c Created btrfs_get_subvol_info() from parts of cmd_subvol_show() Moved get_subvol_name() to subvolume.c Moved

[PATCH] btrfs-progs: add stat check in open_ctree_fs_info

Currently, open_ctree_fs_info will open whatever path you pass it and try to interpret it as a BTRFS filesystem. While this is not nessecarily dangerous (except possibly if done on a character device), it does result in some rather cryptic and non-sensical error messages when trying to run

Re: [PATCH] btrfs-progs: fix incorrect column order

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:08:24PM +0100, Alexander Fougner wrote: > Signed-off-by: Alexander Fougner 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