On Tue, Dec 04, 2018 at 10:29:49PM +, Chris Mason wrote:
> I think (hope) this is:
>
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=201685
>
> Which was just nailed down to a blkmq bug. It triggers when you have
> scsi devices using elevator=none over blkmq.
Thanks a lot Chris. Really.
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 06:02:47PM +0100, David Sterba wrote:
> You've put your time to find and fix the typos so you deserve the
> credit. Because you sent them with the signed-off-by line I will use
Ok, David, thanks a lot.
So, I'm going to rework the patch with the various suggestion, and
then
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 04:56:20PM +0100, David Sterba wrote:
>
> Thanks, such patches are accepted once in a while when the amount of new
> typo fixes becomes noticeable.
About this patch (and the others sent to this m/l), I don't
care to have them committed with my name.
Feel free to
On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 10:16:52PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>
> But it's less a concerning problem since it doesn't reach latest RC, so
> if you could reproduce it stably, I'd recommend to do a bisect.
No problem to bisect, usually.
But right now it's not possible for me, I explain further.
Signed-off-by: Andrea Gelmini
---
Stupid fixes. Made on 4.20-rc4, and ported on linux-next (next-20181128).
fs/btrfs/backref.c | 4 ++--
fs/btrfs/check-integrity.c | 2 +-
fs/btrfs/compression.c | 4 ++--
fs/btrfs/ctree.c | 4 ++--
fs/btrfs/dev-replace.c | 2
Wise words from Qu:
https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org/msg82557.html
---
Documentation/btrfs-scrub.asciidoc | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/btrfs-scrub.asciidoc
b/Documentation/btrfs-scrub.asciidoc
index 4c49269..1fc085c
On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 09:13:02AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>
>
> On 2018/11/26 下午11:01, Andrea Gelmini wrote:
> > One question: I can completely trust the ok return status of scrub? I
> > know is made for this, but shit happens...
>
> No, scrub only checks c
Signed-off-by: Andrea Gelmini
---
Documentation/DocConventions | 4 ++--
Documentation/ReleaseChecklist| 4 ++--
Documentation/btrfs-man5.asciidoc | 8
Documentation/btrfs-property.asciidoc | 2 +-
Documentation/btrfs-qgroup.asciidoc | 4 ++--
Documentation
On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 03:41:55PM +0200, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
> On 27.11.18 г. 15:37 ч., Andrea Gelmini wrote:
>
> Wrong position of space, should be mailing list
Thanks a lot Nikolay for the review.
I'm going to send new version.
Thanks again,
Andrea
Signed-off-by: Andrea Gelmini
---
Documentation/DocConventions | 4 ++--
Documentation/ReleaseChecklist| 4 ++--
Documentation/btrfs-man5.asciidoc | 8
Documentation/btrfs-property.asciidoc | 2 +-
Documentation/btrfs-qgroup.asciidoc | 4 ++--
Documentation
Hi everybody,
and thanks a lot for your work.
I'm using BTRFS over LVM over cryptsetup, over Samsung SSD 860 EVO (latest
git of btrfs-progs).
Usually I run kernel in development, because I know BTRFS is young and there
are still lots of bugs and corner case to fix.
Anyway, I just
2013/11/24 Kai Krakow hurikhan77+bt...@gmail.com:
Did you try to mount in recovery mode? This may, however, mount an older
version of your superblock which does not refer to your latest additions of
files on the disk but it may be newer than what you got in your backup.
Hi Kai,
and thanks a
2013/6/24 Josef Bacik jba...@fusionio.com:
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 05:33:59AM +0200, Andrea Gelmini wrote:
So it looks like you just have a few transid mismatches but we manage to find
something that works out just fine. Could you make an image of this fs for me
and upload it somewhere so I
Hi everybody,
and thanks a lot for your work.
I have this problem.
With latest 3.9 kernel and btrfs-next I was close to full my home.
The system went read only mode while I was copying in some files.
Everything was good. I can't write, but I can read and copy last files.
Then
2013/6/23 Andrea Gelmini andrea.gelm...@gmail.com:
The system went read only mode while I was copying in some files.
I reply to myself to add the kernel complain when BTFS switched to ro mode:
Jun 23 05:01:06 glen kernel: [46511.108103] device label GelmaWdUsb2T
devid 1 transid 1479 /dev
Hi everybody,
and thanks a lot for your support and work.
I've an external hard drive formatted with BTRFS that sometimes
goes readonly (no complains in logs or dmesg output).
It happens with kernel v9.4 and latest vanilla kernel in dev, too.
If I check it I got (git BTRFS progs):
2013/6/7 Josef Bacik jba...@fusionio.com:
and see if that works better? Thanks,
Perfect:
Checking filesystem on /dev/mapper/toshi
UUID: 35eb15cd-d7e3-4be8-92f1-7b210353e241
checking extents
checking free space cache
checking fs roots
checking csums
checking root refs
found 86358842550 bytes
2012/3/21 Liu Bo liubo2...@cn.fujitsu.com:
Any comments?
No comment, but I'm using this patches without problem since you
published it (compressed
/home with hourly snapshot delete/creation).
Thanks a lot for your work,
Andrea
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe
2012/3/20 Daniel J Blueman dan...@quora.org:
mkfs.btrfs -m raid0 -d raid0 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdc1
mount /dev/sdb1 /mnt
umount /mnt
mount /dev/sdb1 /mnt -o compress
umount /mnt
mount /dev/sdb1 /mnt -o ssd
umount /mnt
mount /dev/sdb1 /mnt -o discard
umount /mnt
mount /dev/sdb1 /mnt
mount
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 09:09:47AM +0100, Arne Jansen wrote:
Normally when there are 2 copies of a block, we add both to the
reada extent tree and prefetch only the one that is easier to reach.
This way we can better utilize multiple devices.
In case of DUP this makes no sense as both copies
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 12:38:17PM +0800, Wang Sheng-Hui wrote:
Remove the magic number 128 in btrfs/ulist.c.
Introduce the macro definition ULIST_SIZE_INCREMENT in btrfs/ulist.h.
I'm using this patch without problem since you published it (compressed
/home with hourly snapshot
On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 08:16:58PM -0500, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
Delete the instances of module.h that aren't actually used
or needed. Replace with export.h as required.
I'm using this patch without problem since you published it (compressed
/home with hourly snapshot delete/creation).
Thanks
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 07:17:09PM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
This deadlock comes from xfstests 251.
We'll hold the chunk_mutex throughout the whole of a chunk allocation.
But if we find that we've used up system chunk space, we need to allocate a
new system chunk, but this will lead to a
s/eveery/every/
Signed-off-by: Andrea Gelmini andrea.gelm...@gelma.net
---
man/btrfs.8.in |2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/man/btrfs.8.in b/man/btrfs.8.in
index 8e3b2f5..e2792c9 100644
--- a/man/btrfs.8.in
+++ b/man/btrfs.8.in
@@ -137,7 +137,7 @@ is similar
2012/2/1 Kai Krakow hurikhan77+bt...@gmail.com:
Just happened while writing a huge avi file to my usb3 backup disk:
Same problem here, I try to give the filesystem history:
a) three days ago I format a 219GB partition:
1) latest Linus' git kernel tree;
2) two nested subvolumes;
3)
2011/12/16 Goffredo Baroncelli kreij...@inwind.it:
I found a solution, but requires a bit of setup.
Did you try:
echo force-unsafe-io /etc/dpkg/dpkg.cfg
You need dpkg 1.16.
Ciao,
Andrea
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a message to
2011/11/7 Arne Jansen sensi...@gmx.net:
On what platform are you running this? Can you please try this after
a fresh boot? Maybe there's an allocation that can't be served with
a badly fragmented memory.
Hi Arne,
and thanks a lot for your reply.
So:
a) it's a fresh Ubuntu 11.04, with
2011/11/7 Roman Mamedov r...@romanrm.ru:
If so, shouldn't there also be a corresponding dmesg warning about Unable to
allocate, which would confirm or rule this out?
So before following the did you try turning it off and on again advice (and
throwing away useful debug info), I'd suggest
2011/11/7 Arne Jansen sensi...@gmx.net:
is it 32 or 64 bit?
64bit.
Please take a look at my other reply.
Thanks a lot for your time,
Andrea
--
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
2011/11/6 Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com:
Hi Chris,
and thanks a lot for your work.
Arne Jansen and Jan Schmidt have improved the scrubber and provided
utilities to walk btrfs' many backrefs. The scrubber is much faster
thanks to extensive btree readahead and instead of just telling
2011/5/30 Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com:
Ok, so I think we're blowing past the end of the page we've kmap'd. But
I don't think that can happen without something like the patch below
triggering:
Quick update: after rm of ~10 GB of data, I rebooted with Linus' latest
git tree, and it works
2011/5/29 Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com:
Thanks, could you please send in the photos of the oops when you get
chance.
Well, I retested everything compiling with frame pointers, so:
a) partition is mounted with this flags:
defaults,ssd,noacl,space_cache (at the beginning I also used
2011/5/30 Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com:
These are perfect, thank you. We're failing to write out the inode
cache. Since you're on a 32 bit machine, I'm guessing that we failed to
kmap something properly.
Thanks a lot for detailed info.
I recompiled, and get this:
gelma@dell:~$ gdb
2011/5/29 Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com:
Thanks, could you please send in the photos of the oops when you get
chance.
By the way, switching from 2.6.38.7 to 2.6.39, I have a lot of this messages:
[ 140.297248] block group 1107296256 has an wrong amount of free space
[ 140.848435] block
Hi all,
and thanks a lot for your work.
Well, I'm using my home with BTRFS. It's a Ext4 converted to BTRFS
via btrfs-convert.
Everything works good with stock Ubuntu 11.04 kernel (2.6.38),
vanilla 2.6.38 and vanilla 2.6.39.
If I use Linus' git tree, BTRFS ooops at mount.
So I
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c: ctree.h is included more than once.
Signed-off-by: Andrea Gelmini andrea.gelm...@gelma.net
---
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c |1 -
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
index 2845c6c..5c9f8b3 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
2008/10/9 Chris Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Yan,
Can these leaf ref miss warnings trigger corruptions? I thought not but
its clear there is some metadata corruption here:
Andrea, how exactly did you trigger this?
Nothing in particular, usual work session on my laptop.
It seems to be it was a
2008/10/3 Chris Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Fri, 2008-10-03 at 22:22 +0200, Martin Bürger wrote:
Thank you, this is great news. I had asked Andrea to try the same
thing. Toei Rei we might have finally tracked down the metadata
corruptions you've been seeing.
Just enabling LBD seems to fix
2008/10/4 Andrea Gelmini [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
2008/10/3 Chris Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Fri, 2008-10-03 at 22:22 +0200, Martin Bürger wrote:
Thank you, this is great news. I had asked Andrea to try the same
thing. Toei Rei we might have finally tracked down the metadata
corruptions you've
39 matches
Mail list logo
