On 2018/11/28 12:04 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2018/11/28 上午11:11, Su Yue wrote:
This patchset can be fetched from repo:
https://github.com/Damenly/btrfs-devel/commits/priority_aware_allocator.
Since patchset 'btrfs: Refactor find_free_extent()' does a nice work
to simplify find_free_extent
On 11/28/18 4:24 PM, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
On 28.11.18 г. 5:11 ч., Su Yue wrote:
To implement priority aware allocator, this patch:
Introduces struct btrfs_priority_tree which contains block groups
in same level.
Adds member priority to struct btrfs_block_group_cache and pointer
points
In function do_trimming(), block_group->lock should be unlocked first.
Fixes: 7fe1e6415026 ("Btrfs: rewrite btrfs_trim_block_group()")
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache
In origin, find_free_extent() just searches block groups in space_info
one by one.
In priority aware allocator, we first search block groups in
higher priority tree than in lower priority tree.
This helper unify above two ways for further use.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
If use priority aware allocator, bg->priority_tree->groups_sem should
be written instead of space_info->groups_sem.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 60 +++---
1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btr
Introduce btrfs_update_block_group_priority() to update
block_groups::priority. It will move block group from old tree
to new tree if need.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 76 ++
1 file changed, 76 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs
Introduce create_priority_trees() to create priority trees in
space_info.
Introduce remove_priority_trees() to remove priority trees in
space_info.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 94 ++
1 file changed, 94 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs
Add mount option "priority_alloc=%s", now %s only supports "usage" and
"off". The latter is used for remount.
"priority_alloc=usage" will active priority aware allocator.
This mount option changes the way of find_free_extent to search
block groups and ma
Add member priority_tree to find_free_extent_ctl to represents the
tree using.
Modify find_free_extent to use find_free_extent_search, so it can
work in default mount option and priorit aware allocator.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 114
...
unlock block_group
up_read tree
This patch introduce three macros to represents block group is removing
/need to updated / busy.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 9 +
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
Introduce compute_block_group_usage() and compute_block_group_usage().
And call the latter in btrfs_make_block_group() and
btrfs_read_block_groups().
compute_priority_level use ilog2(free) to compute priority level.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 60
Export btrfs_remove_block_group_priority() to header ctree.h.
Call btrfs_remove_block_group_priority() while deleting
transaction->deleted_bgs, btrfs_free_block_groups() and
btrfs_remove_block_group().
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 1 +
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 3 +++
Now implementation of priority allocator only support usage option.
Add BTRFS_MOUNT_PRIORITY_USAGE for further commits.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
index 5c4651d8a524..4c56baf9f7cf 100644
Since if use priority alloc, we should down/up_write()
bg->priority_groups_sem.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 10 --
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
index f530a4344368..6627bbe56ad5 100
Add block group to priority tree in btrfs_read_block_groups()
and btrfs_make_block_groups().
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
index 2dec02782df1..fc40901b4772 100644
--- a/fs
oup() to update priority tree if needed.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
fs/btrfs/ctree.h| 2 ++
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 40 +
fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c | 3 +++
3 files changed, 45 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h b/fs/btrfs/ctre
Introduce compute_priority_level() to compute priority level according
priority, now just divides PRIORITY_USAGE_FACOTR.
Introduce add_block_group_priority() to add block groups to
priority tree.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 76
Introduce btrfs_remove_block_group_priority() to remove block group
from priority tree.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 37 +
1 file changed, 37 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
index 5bae757786dc
Call create_priority_trees() in create_space_info().
Call remove_priority_trees() before free of space_info.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 21 +
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent
to represents
priority trees in different raid types.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 24
1 file changed, 24 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
index e62824cae00a..5c4651d8a524 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
+++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
es time and hardware, the use-case is not
outstanding enough. And some codes are dirty but I can't found another
way. So I named it as RFC.
Any comments and suggestions are welcome.
Su Yue (17):
btrfs: priority alloc: prepare of priority aware allocator
btrfs: add mount definition BTRFS_
On 11/3/18 5:20 PM, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
On 3.11.18 г. 3:34 ч., Su Yue wrote:
On 2018/11/2 10:10 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
Hey Su.
Sorry for the late reply cause I'm busy at other things.
Anything further I need to do in this matter or can I consider it
"solved&quo
On 2018/11/2 10:10 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
Hey Su.
Sorry for the late reply cause I'm busy at other things.
Anything further I need to do in this matter or can I consider it
"solved" and you won't need further testing by my side, but just PR the
patches of that branch? :-)
On 10/23/18 6:04 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2018/10/23 下午5:41, Su Yue wrote:
Since repair will do CoW, the outer path may be invalid,
add an argument path to punch_extent_hole().
When punch_extent_hole() returns, path will still point to the item
before calling punch_extent_hole();
Signed
On 10/23/18 6:30 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2018/10/23 下午5:41, Su Yue wrote:
Previously, @err are assigned immediately after check but before
repair.
repair_extent_item()'s return value also confuses the caller. If
error has been repaired and returns 0, check_extent_item() will try
Lowmem can repair after commit
'btrfs-progs: lowmem: move nbytes check before isize check',
so add the beacon file.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
tests/fsck-tests/001-bad-file-extent-bytenr/.lowmem_repairable | 0
1 file changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
create mode 100644
tests
From: Su Yanjun
The reason for revert is that according to the existing situation, the
probability of problem in the extent tree is higher than in the fs tree.
So this feature should be removed.
Signed-off-by: Su Yanjun
---
check/main.c | 103
From: Su Yanjun
In original mode, if some file extent item has unaligned extent backref,
fixup_extent_refs can't repair it. This patch will check extent alignment
then delete file extent with unaligned extent backref.
Signed-off-by: Su Yanjun
---
check/main.c | 278
From: Su Yanjun
It may cost more time to search all extent data of correspond files but
should not influence total speed too much cause that only corrupted
extent items are participated in.
Signed-off-by: Su Yanjun
---
check/main.c | 110 ++-
1
From: Lu Fengqi
The missing extent will lead to the existence of the gap between adjacent
extents. The fsck should can detect the gap correctly and repair by punch
a hole.
Signed-off-by: Lu Fengqi
---
.../.lowmem_repairable | 0
For files, lowmem repair will try to check nbytes and isize,
but isize check depends nbytes.
Once bytes has been repaired, then isize should be checked and
repaired.
So move nbytes check before isize check. Also set nbytes to
extent_size once repaired successfully.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
The function can delete items in trees besides extent tree.
Rename and move it for further use.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
check/mode-lowmem.c | 99 +++--
1 file changed, 51 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-)
diff --git a/check/mode-lowmem.c b/check/mode
From: Su Yanjun
The reason for revert is that according to the existing situation, the
probability of problem in the extent tree is higher than in the fs Tree.
So this feature should be removed.
Signed-off-by: Su Yanjun
---
check/main.c | 120
From: Lu Fengqi
The 'end' parameter of check_file_extent tracks the ending offset of the
last checked extent. This is used to detect gaps between adjacent extents.
Currently such gaps are wrongly detected since for regular extents only
the size of the extent is added to the 'end' parameter.
Since repair will do CoW, the outer path may be invalid,
add an argument path to punch_extent_hole().
When punch_extent_hole() returns, path will still point to the item
before calling punch_extent_hole();
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
check/mode-lowmem.c | 21 -
1 file changed
Add support to check unaligned disk_bytenr for extent_data.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
check/mode-lowmem.c | 9 -
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/check/mode-lowmem.c b/check/mode-lowmem.c
index 35fe1adf58e6..e8a2e825c0f3 100644
--- a/check/mode-lowmem.c
+++ b
return codes only represents status
of the extent item, error bits are passed by pointer.
Move the change of @err after repair.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
check/mode-lowmem.c | 106
1 file changed, 68 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
diff --git a/check
epair and report function for
orphan file extent."
btrfs-progs: Revert "btrfs-progs: Record orphan data extent ref to
corresponding root."
btrfs-progs: check: fix bug in find_possible_backrefs
btrfs-progs: check: Delete file extent item with unaligned extent
backref
Su Yu
If found a extent data item has unaligned part, lowmem repair
just deletes it.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
check/mode-lowmem.c | 8
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff --git a/check/mode-lowmem.c b/check/mode-lowmem.c
index 3c9ecff7e498..5381096fa8b2 100644
--- a/check/mode-lowmem.c
[Bad format in previous reply, send again]
On 10/18/18 10:41 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
Hey.
So I'm back from a longer vacation and had now the time to try out your
patches from below:
On Wed, 2018-09-05 at 15:04 +0800, Su Yue wrote:
I found the errors should blame to something
On 10/18/18 10:41 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
Hey.
So I'm back from a longer vacation and had now the time to try out your
patches from below:
On Wed, 2018-09-05 at 15:04 +0800, Su Yue wrote:
I found the errors should blame to something about inode_extref check
in lowmem mode.
I
during find_free_extent() refactor.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
Reviewed-by: Su Yue
---
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 253 ++---
1 file changed, 161 insertions(+), 92 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
index de6f75f5547b
in that block group
| |- Check if the result is valid
| | |- If valid, then exit
| |- Jump to next block group
|
|- Push harder to find free extents
|- If not found, re-iterate all block groups
Clean enough.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
Reviewed-by: Su Yue
---
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 218
Wenruo
Reviewed-by: Su Yue
---
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 112 -
1 file changed, 66 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
index a603900e0eb8..5bc8919edac2 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
+++ b/fs
of jumping between different labels in find_free_extent(), the
helper function will use return value to indicate different behavior.
LGTM for code. One nit in comment.
Reviewed-by: Su Yue
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
---
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 239 -
1 file
On 8/21/18 4:44 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Instead of tons of different local variables in find_free_extent(),
extract them into find_free_extent_ctrl structure, and add better
explanation for them.
Some modification may looks redundant, but will later greatly simplify
function parameter list
Wenruo
Reviewed-by: Su Yue
---
check/main.c | 99
1 file changed, 99 insertions(+)
diff --git a/check/main.c b/check/main.c
index bc2ee22f7943..ff9a785ce555 100644
--- a/check/main.c
+++ b/check/main.c
@@ -8224,6 +8224,99 @@ out
On 10/8/18 8:30 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Add such check at check_dev_item(), since at that timing we're also
iterating dev extents for dev item accounting.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
LGTM.
Reviewed-by: Su Yue
---
check/mode-lowmem.c | 34 --
1 file changed
On 10/8/18 3:00 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Add such check at check_dev_item(), since at that timing we're also
iterating dev extents for dev item accounting.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
---
check/mode-lowmem.c | 32 ++--
1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
On 10/8/18 3:00 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Now two locations can detect such problem, either by device item
used/total bytes check, or by early dev extents check against device
boundary.
The image is hand-crafted image which uses DATA SINGLE chunk to feed
btrfs check.
As expected, as long as block
have to deal with page mappings
their implementation is vastly simplified by simply setting each bit in
the passed range.
Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov
Reviewed-by: Su Yue
---
extent_io.c | 56
extent_io.h | 4
2 files changed
On 9/28/18 7:59 AM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Although we have tree level check at tree read runtime, it's completely
based on its parent level.
We still need to do accurate level check to avoid invalid tree blocks
sneak into kernel space.
The check itself is simple, for leaf its level should always
s parent level.
> We still need to do accurate level check to avoid invalid tree blocks
> sneak into kernel space.
>
> The check itself is simple, for leaf its level should always be 0.
> For nodes its level should be in range [1, BTRFS_MAX_LEVEL - 1].
>
> Signed-off-by: Qu
On 9/25/18 8:06 AM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Since we're following the name size limit of linux, just use NAME_MAX.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
Reviewed-by: Su Yue
---
fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
index
On 9/18/18 1:32 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2018/9/17 下午9:24, Su Yue wrote:
On 2018/9/17 8:53 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2018/9/17 下午3:28, Su Yue wrote:
After call of check_inode_item(), path may point to the last unchecked
slot of the leaf. The outer walk_up_tree() always treats
On 2018/9/17 8:53 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2018/9/17 下午3:28, Su Yue wrote:
After call of check_inode_item(), path may point to the last unchecked
slot of the leaf. The outer walk_up_tree() always treats the position
as checked slot then skips to the next. The last item will never be
checked
On 2018/9/17 8:51 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2018/9/17 下午3:28, Su Yue wrote:
In check_fs_roots_lowmem(), we do search and follow the resulted path
to call check_fs_root(), then call btrfs_next_item() to check next
root.
However, if repair is enabled, the root tree can be cowed, the
existed
check_fs_root,
search the saved key again before checking next root.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
check/mode-lowmem.c | 22 ++
1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
diff --git a/check/mode-lowmem.c b/check/mode-lowmem.c
index 4db12cc7f9fe..db44456fd85b 100644
--- a/check/mode
default_case.img to inode_ref_without_dir_item_and_index.img.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
.../inode_extref_without_dir_item_and_index.img | Bin 0 -> 4096 bytes
... => inode_ref_without_dir_item_and_index.img} | Bin
2 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
create mode 100644
tests/fsck-tes
The argument index is not used in btrfs_lookup_inode_extref(),
so remove it.
And adjust positions its arguments to make it consistent with
kernel part.
No functional change.
Fixes: 260675657767 ("btrfs-progs: Import btrfs_insert/del/lookup_extref()
functions.")
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
errors.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
check/mode-lowmem.c | 125 +++-
1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
diff --git a/check/mode-lowmem.c b/check/mode-lowmem.c
index 612e5e28e45b..53e4fdccd740 100644
--- a/check/mode-lowmem.c
+++ b/check/mode
tions.")
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo
---
inode.c | 14 +-
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/inode.c b/inode.c
index 2398bca4a109..598ad0ab6b4c 100644
--- a/inode.c
+++ b/inode.c
@@ -277,6 +277,7 @@ int btrfs_unlink(struct btrfs_trans_han
t;)
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
check/mode-lowmem.c | 37 +
1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/check/mode-lowmem.c b/check/mode-lowmem.c
index db44456fd85b..612e5e28e45b 100644
--- a/check/mode-lowmem.c
+++ b/check/mode-lowmem.c
@
be @di_key.
Change comment about parameters too.
To keep compactness, move declarations into while loop in
check_dir_item().
Fixes: 564901eac7a4 ("btrfs-progs: check: introduce print_dir_item_err()")
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
check/mode-lowmem.c | 22 +++---
1 file ch
with inode_extref now. Suggested by Qu Wenruo.
v2:
Resend with patches in right order.
Su Yue (7):
btrfs-progs: adjust arguments of btrfs_lookup_inode_extref()
btrfs-progs: make btrfs_unlink() lookup inode_extref
btrfs-progs: lowmem check: find dir_item by di_key in check_dir_item()
btrfs-progs
On 09/14/2018 02:27 PM, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
On 14.09.2018 03:58, Su Yue wrote:
On 09/14/2018 07:37 AM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2018/9/13 上午4:49, damenly...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Su Yue
In check_fs_roots_lowmem(), we do search and follow the resulted path
to call check_fs_root
On 09/14/2018 07:43 AM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2018/9/13 上午4:49, damenly...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Su Yue
After call of check_inode_item(), path may point to the last unchecked
slot of the leaf. The outer walk_up_tree() always treats the position
as checked item then skips to next item
On 09/14/2018 07:37 AM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2018/9/13 上午4:49, damenly...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Su Yue
In check_fs_roots_lowmem(), we do search and follow the resulted path
to call check_fs_root(), then call btrfs_next_item() to check next
root.
However, if repair is enabled, the root
On 09/14/2018 07:33 AM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2018/9/13 上午4:49, damenly...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Su Yue
In check_dir_item, we are going to search corresponding
dir_item/index.
Commit 564901eac7a4 ("btrfs-progs: check: introduce
print_dir_item_err()") Changed argument nam
Sorry for the noise, Please ignore this patchset.
Will send v2.
On 2018/9/13 3:20 AM, damenly...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Su Yue
This patchset can be fetched from my github(based on v4.17.1):
https://github.com/Damenly/btrfs-progs/tree/lowmem_extref
The patchset aims to support check
On 2018/7/16 11:39 PM, David Sterba wrote:
On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 03:47:43PM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
Hello,
Here is a series which adds support for delayed refs. This is needed to enable
later work on
On 2018/9/5 8:33 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
On Wed, 2018-09-05 at 15:04 +0800, Su Yue wrote:
Agreed with Qu, btrfs-check shall not try to do any write.
Well.. it could have been just some coincidence :-)
I found the errors should blame to something about inode_extref check
On 09/04/2018 04:24 AM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
Hey.
On Fri, 2018-08-31 at 10:33 +0800, Su Yue wrote:
Can you please fetch btrfs-progs from my repo and run lowmem check
in readonly?
Repo: https://github.com/Damenly/btrfs-progs/tree/lowmem_debug
It's based on v4.17.1 plus additonal
62f87bad9c ("Btrfs: rework outstanding_extents")
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
index 63600dc2ac4c..c180ded27092 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
@@ -1308
On 09/01/2018 02:43 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
btrfs-progs v4.17.1
man btrfs-scrub:
-R
print raw statistics per-device instead of a summary
However, on a two device Btrfs volume, -R does not show per device
statistics. See screenshot:
-by: Chris Murphy
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
Documentation/btrfs-scrub.asciidoc | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/btrfs-scrub.asciidoc
b/Documentation/btrfs-scrub.asciidoc
index d2d206275c36..4c49269e2f36 100644
--- a/Documentation/btrfs-scrub.asci
Thank for the report.
On 08/31/2018 12:47 AM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
Hey.
I've the following on a btrfs that's basically the system fs for my
notebook:
When booting from a USB stick with:
# uname -a
Linux heisenberg 4.17.0-3-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 4.17.17-1
(2018-08-18) x86_64
.
This patch let check_arg_type return -errno if realpath failed.
And print strerror if check_arg_type failed and the returned code
is negative. Like:
$ btrfs inspect-internal dump-tree nothingness
ERROR: invalid argument: nothingness: No such file or directory
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
cmds
.
This is especially handy to inspect high level trees, e.g. comparing
tree reloc tree with its source tree.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
LGTM.
Reviewed-by: Su Yue
---
Documentation/btrfs-inspect-internal.asciidoc | 5 ++
cmds-inspect-dump-tree.c | 26 --
print-tree.c
Merillat
> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
Some nitpicks below.
After fixes them, you can add tag:
Reviewed-by: Su Yue
> ---
> This can patch can be fetched from github repo:
> https://github.com/adam900710/btrfs-progs/tree/quota_disable
> ---
> Documentation/btrf
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2018 at 3:38 AM
> From: "Nikolay Borisov"
> To: damenly...@gmail.com, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: "Su Yue"
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] btrfs-progs: task: add prefn() to task_info and
> simplify task_start()
On 08/06/2018 02:17 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2018年08月06日 13:25, Misono Tomohiro wrote:
There are two members in struct btrfs_root which indicate root's
objectid: ->objectid and ->root_key.objectid.
They are both set to the same value in __setup_root():
static void __setup_root(struct
havior (BUG_ON).
Reported-by: Xu Wen
Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=200403
Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=200407
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
LGTM.
Reviewed-by: Su Yue
---
fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 7 ++
fs/btrfs/volumes.c
-by: Qu Wenruo
Reviewed-by: Su Yue
---
fs/btrfs/ctree.c | 57 +++---
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 28 +++
fs/btrfs/extent_io.c | 8 --
fs/btrfs/free-space-tree.c | 4 ++-
fs/btrfs/locking.c | 13 +++--
fs
or each block
group at mount time.
Here we reuse the original find_first_block_group(), which is already
doing basic bg -> chunk check, adding more check on start/len and type
flags.
Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=199837
Reported-by: Xu Wen
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
-by: Qu Wenruo
OK.. I looked through every places where the callee is called.
Those errors are handled gracefully as my thought.
Except one nitpick, the %llu about pid_t in btrfs_tree_lock.
However, you can add the tag:
Reviewed-by: Su Yue
---
fs/btrfs/ctree.c | 57
On 07/19/2018 03:05 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
DATA RELOC tree should also never be empty.
Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=200407
Reported-by: Xu Wen
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
Reviewed-by: Su Yue
---
It's possible just fold this fix into commit "btrfs: tree-checker: D
On 07/17/2018 04:01 PM, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
On 17.07.2018 10:46, Qu Wenruo wrote:
[BUG]
For certain fuzzed btrfs image, if we create any csum data, it would
cause the following kernel warning and deadlock when trying to update
csum tree:
--
[ 278.113360] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 41 at
,u64' for users(developers more
likely) to appoint a specific key to search and dump, then the path
from root node down the leaf will be dumped.
The search of the key costs most time of this way.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
Change log:
v2:
Rename btrfs_search_spec_key() to btrfs_search_print_path
On 07/16/2018 03:45 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2018年07月16日 13:55, Su Yue wrote:
For big filesystems, there are many items in trees(extent tree
specially).
For example, to dump one extent, we usually dump extent tree then pipe
result to grep. The time-consuming part is that dump tree traverses
,u64' for users(developer more
likely) to appoint a specific key to search and dump, then the path
from root node down the leaf will be dumped.
The search of the key costs most time of this way.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue
---
In my experiment, not usual case though.
Image was provided by Chris Murphy
On 07/11/2018 11:36 AM, Marc MERLIN wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 09:58:36AM +0800, Su Yue wrote:
On 07/11/2018 09:44 AM, Marc MERLIN wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 09:08:40AM +0800, Su Yue wrote:
On 07/11/2018 08:58 AM, Marc MERLIN wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 08:53:58AM +0800, Su
On 07/11/2018 09:44 AM, Marc MERLIN wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 09:08:40AM +0800, Su Yue wrote:
On 07/11/2018 08:58 AM, Marc MERLIN wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 08:53:58AM +0800, Su Yue wrote:
Problems
1) btrfs check --repair _still_ takes all 32GB of RAM and crashes the
server
On 07/11/2018 08:58 AM, Marc MERLIN wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 08:53:58AM +0800, Su Yue wrote:
Problems
1) btrfs check --repair _still_ takes all 32GB of RAM and crashes the
server, despite my deleting lots of snapshots.
Is it because I have too many files then?
Yes. Original check
On 07/10/2018 06:53 PM, Su Yue wrote:
On 07/10/2018 12:10 PM, Marc MERLIN wrote:
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 08:56:15AM +0800, Su Yue wrote:
I'm just not clear if my FS is still damaged and btrfsck was just
hacked to
ignore the damage it can't deal with, or whether it was able to repair
On 07/11/2018 02:09 AM, Marc MERLIN wrote:
Thanks to Su and Qu, I was able to get my filesystem to a point that
it's mountable.
I then deleted loads of snapshots and I'm down to 26.
IT now looks like this:
gargamel:~# btrfs fi show /mnt/mnt
Label: 'dshelf2' uuid:
On 07/10/2018 12:55 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2018年07月10日 11:50, Marc MERLIN wrote:
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 09:34:36AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Ok, this is where I am now:
WARNING: debug: end of checking extent item[18457780273152 169 1]
type: 176 offset: 2
checking extent items
[CC to linux-btrfs]
Here is the log of wrong extent data.
On 07/08/2018 01:21 AM, Marc MERLIN wrote:
On Fri, Jul 06, 2018 at 10:56:36AM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote:
On Fri, Jul 06, 2018 at 09:05:23AM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote:
Ok, this is where I am now:
WARNING: debug: end of checking extent
Forgot to CC Marc.
On 07/10/2018 09:33 AM, Su Yue wrote:
[FWD to linux-btrfs]
Thanks to Marc's patient of running and tests btrfsck lowmem mode
in recent days.
The FS has a large extent tree but luckily few are corrupted, they are
all fixed by special version. Reloc trees were cleaned too.
So
.
Error messages are showed in the last.
Forwarded Message
Subject: Re: So, does btrfs check lowmem take days? weeks?
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2018 10:48:18 -0700
From: Marc MERLIN
To: Su Yue
CC: quwenruo.bt...@gmx.com, Su Yue
Success!
Well done Su, this is a huge improvement
1 - 100 of 453 matches
Mail list logo
