This fixes the following errors:
fs/btrfs/reada.c: In function ‘btrfs_reada_wait’:
fs/btrfs/reada.c:958:42: error: invalid operands to binary (have ‘atomic_t’
and ‘int’)
fs/btrfs/reada.c:961:41: error: invalid operands to binary (have ‘atomic_t’
and ‘int’)
Signed-off-by: Vincent Stehlé
Liu Bo wrote (ao):
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 02:28:51AM +0200, Ochi wrote:
The situation is the following: I have created a backup-volume to
which I regularly rsync a backup of my system into a subvolume.
After rsync'ing, I take a _read-only_ snapshot of that subvolume
with a timestamp
We need such a sanity check for wrong start, otherwise, even with
a wrong start that's larger than file size, we can end up not only
changing inode's force compress flag but also FS's incompat flags.
Signed-off-by: Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com
---
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 11 +++
1 files
In order to sparse exact error message, we need to record errno here.
Signed-off-by: Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com
---
cmds-filesystem.c |1 +
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/cmds-filesystem.c b/cmds-filesystem.c
index 2210020..3f386e2 100644
---
On Tue, April 16, 2013 at 10:40 (+0200), Liu Bo wrote:
We need such a sanity check for wrong start, otherwise, even with
a wrong start that's larger than file size, we can end up not only
changing inode's force compress flag but also FS's incompat flags.
That reads out very cryptic. Can you
The kernel side for rescan, which is needed if you want to enable qgroup
tracking on a non-empty volume. The first patch splits
btrfs_qgroup_account_ref into readable ans reusable units. The second
patch adds the rescan implementation (refer to its commit message for a
description of the
If qgroup tracking is out of sync, a rescan operation can be started. It
iterates the complete extent tree and recalculates all qgroup tracking data.
This is an expensive operation and should not be used unless required.
A filesystem under rescan can still be umounted. The rescan continues on the
When qgroup tracking is enabled, we do an automatic cycle of the new rescan
mechanism.
Signed-off-by: Jan Schmidt list.bt...@jan-o-sch.net
---
fs/btrfs/qgroup.c | 10 ++
1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c b/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c
index
The function is separated into a preparation part and the three accounting
steps mentioned in the qgroups documentation. The goal is to make steps two
and three usable by the rescan functionality. A side effect is that the
function is restructured into readable subunits.
Signed-off-by: Jan
Hello Jan,
The function is separated into a preparation part and the three accounting
steps mentioned in the qgroups documentation. The goal is to make steps two
and three usable by the rescan functionality. A side effect is that the
function is restructured into readable subunits.
How
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 10:44:33AM +0200, Jan Schmidt wrote:
On Tue, April 16, 2013 at 10:40 (+0200), Liu Bo wrote:
We need such a sanity check for wrong start, otherwise, even with
a wrong start that's larger than file size, we can end up not only
changing inode's force compress flag but
We need such a sanity check for wrong start when we defrag a file, otherwise,
even with a wrong start that's larger than file size, we can end up changing
not only inode's force compress flag but also FS's incompat flags.
Signed-off-by: Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com
---
v2: make changelog more
Hello, Jan
If qgroup tracking is out of sync, a rescan operation can be started. It
iterates the complete extent tree and recalculates all qgroup tracking data.
This is an expensive operation and should not be used unless required.
A filesystem under rescan can still be umounted. The rescan
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
volumes.c | 9 -
1 file changed, 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/volumes.c b/volumes.c
index b555ded..7a9b6f0 100644
--- a/volumes.c
+++ b/volumes.c
@@ -1643,15 +1643,6 @@ static int read_one_dev(struct btrfs_root *root,
return ret;
On Tue, April 16, 2013 at 11:20 (+0200), Wang Shilong wrote:
Hello Jan,
The function is separated into a preparation part and the three accounting
steps mentioned in the qgroups documentation. The goal is to make steps two
and three usable by the rescan functionality. A side effect is that
On Tue, April 16, 2013 at 11:26 (+0200), Wang Shilong wrote:
Hello, Jan
If qgroup tracking is out of sync, a rescan operation can be started. It
iterates the complete extent tree and recalculates all qgroup tracking data.
This is an expensive operation and should not be used unless required.
Jan Schmidt 写道:
..[snip]..
I don't see where I'm calling ulist_free(roots) in the error path. One of us
is
missing something :-)
Yeah, you are right. i read a more '}'.. ^_^
Thanks,
Wang
+ spin_lock(fs_info-qgroup_lock);
+ seq = fs_info-qgroup_seq;
+
Hello Jan,
On Tue, April 16, 2013 at 11:20 (+0200), Wang Shilong wrote:
Hello Jan,
The function is separated into a preparation part and the three accounting
steps mentioned in the qgroups documentation. The goal is to make steps two
and three usable by the rescan functionality. A side
Hello Jan,
slot = path-slots[0];
ptr = btrfs_item_ptr(l, slot, struct btrfs_qgroup_status_item);
+ spin_lock(fs_info-qgroup_lock);
Why we need hold qgroup_lock here? would you please explain...
Thanks,
Wang
btrfs_set_qgroup_status_flags(l, ptr,
Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong wangsl-f...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
fs/btrfs/backref.c |2 --
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/backref.c b/fs/btrfs/backref.c
index bd605c8..fa531e8 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/backref.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/backref.c
@@ -1461,8 +1461,6 @@ int
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 05:56:05PM +0800, Wang Shilong wrote:
But static checker may want to know what is 3 steps
just by the function name but not to read the pdf.
I'm curious what static checker you mean and how a function name helps
there.
thanks,
david
--
To unsubscribe from this list:
Hi David,
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 05:56:05PM +0800, Wang Shilong wrote:
But static checker may want to know what is 3 steps
just by the function name but not to read the pdf.
I'm curious what static checker you mean and how a function name helps
there.
I mean that other developers will
On Tue, April 16, 2013 at 12:08 (+0200), Wang Shilong wrote:
Hello Jan,
slot = path-slots[0];
ptr = btrfs_item_ptr(l, slot, struct btrfs_qgroup_status_item);
+spin_lock(fs_info-qgroup_lock);
Why we need hold qgroup_lock here? would you please explain...
It would have
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 10:45:19AM +0200, Jan Schmidt wrote:
+static long btrfs_ioctl_quota_rescan_status(struct file *file, void __user
*arg)
+{
+ struct btrfs_root *root = BTRFS_I(fdentry(file)-d_inode)-root;
+ struct btrfs_ioctl_quota_rescan_args *qsa;
+ int ret = 0;
+
+
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 06:47:15PM +0800, Wang Shilong wrote:
I mean that other developers will get more information by the function name.
I don't dare to suggest putting a comment before the functions
david
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of
On 04/16/2013 10:10 AM, Sander wrote:
Liu Bo wrote (ao):
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 02:28:51AM +0200, Ochi wrote:
The situation is the following: I have created a backup-volume to
which I regularly rsync a backup of my system into a subvolume.
After rsync'ing, I take a _read-only_ snapshot of
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 03:55:06PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
If one of the copy of the superblock is zero it does not
confirm to us that btrfs isn't there on that disk. When
we are having more than one copy of superblock we should
rather let the for loop to continue to check other copies.
Hello Jan, more comments below..
[...snip..]
+
+static long btrfs_ioctl_quota_rescan_status(struct file *file, void __user
*arg)
+{
+ struct btrfs_root *root = BTRFS_I(fdentry(file)-d_inode)-root;
+ struct btrfs_ioctl_quota_rescan_args *qsa;
+ int ret = 0;
+
+ if
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 07:08:28PM +0200, Stefan Behrens wrote:
Alex Lyakas (1):
btrfs-progs: Fix the receive code pathing
Stefan Behrens (16):
Btrfs-progs: Use /proc/mounts instead of /etc/mtab
Btrfs-progs: ignore subvols above BTRFS_LAST_FREE_OBJECTID
Btrfs-progs: close file
On Saturday 13 April 2013 17:48:31 Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Hi!
Please answer soon whether it would be a good idea to replay a backup
right now as I am leaving to Berlin tomorrow for a week without my backup
drive with me. Well, I made space on an external 2,5 inch drive, that I
can take
Hi Chris,
I' ve put my efforts in btrfs quota for a period of time. and i send a
bunch of patches
about btrfs quota.
If you pull Jan's qgroup rescan patches, i'd like that you pull my this
patch firstly:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2402871/
Jan's group
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 10:15:25AM +0200, Vincent wrote:
This fixes the following errors:
fs/btrfs/reada.c: In function ‘btrfs_reada_wait’:
fs/btrfs/reada.c:958:42: error: invalid operands to binary (have
‘atomic_t’ and ‘int’)
fs/btrfs/reada.c:961:41: error: invalid operands to
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 05:20:28PM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
We need such a sanity check for wrong start when we defrag a file, otherwise,
even with a wrong start that's larger than file size, we can end up changing
not only inode's force compress flag but also FS's incompat flags.
The range-start
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 03:38:28PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 05:20:28PM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
We need such a sanity check for wrong start when we defrag a file,
otherwise,
even with a wrong start that's larger than file size, we can end up changing
not only
Tried to mount with -o recovery using 3.8.7. No change. Does
anybody have any suggestions?
On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 6:21 PM, Jon Nelson jnel...@jamponi.net wrote:
I have a 4-disk btrfs filesystem in raid1 mode.
I'm running openSUSE 12.3, 3.7.10, x86_64.
A few days ago something went wrong and
Hi All,
I have an LSI HBA card (LSI SAS 9207-8i) with 12 7200rpm SAS drives
attached. When it's formated with mdraid6+ext4 I get about 1200MB/s
for multiple streaming random reads with iozone. With btrfs in
3.9.0-rc4 I can also get about 1200MB/s, but only with one stream at a
time.
As soon as
I was running fsync() tests and noticed that occasionally I was getting a bunch
of errors from fsck complaining about csums not having corresponding extents.
Thankfully after a few days of debugging this it turned out to be a bug with
fsck. The csums were for an extent that started at the same
All we need for restore to work is the chunk root, the tree root and the fs root
we want to restore from. So to do this we need to make a few adjustments
1) Make open_ctree_fs_info fail completely if it can't read the chunk tree.
There is no sense in continuing if we can't read the chunk tree
Hi,
The following series of patches implements in btrfs an ioctl to do
offline deduplication of file extents.
To be clear, offline in this sense means that the file system is
mounted and running, but the dedupe is not done during file writes,
but after the fact when some userspace software
The range locking in btrfs_ioctl_clone is trivially broken out into it's own
function. This reduces the complexity of btrfs_ioctl_clone() by a small bit
and makes that locking code available to future functions in
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
Signed-off-by: Mark Fasheh mfas...@suse.de
---
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c |
There's some 250+ lines here that are easily encapsulated into their own
function. I don't change how anything works here, just create and document
the new btrfs_clone() function from btrfs_ioctl_clone() code.
Signed-off-by: Mark Fasheh mfas...@suse.de
---
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 232
We want this for btrfs_extent_same. Basically readpage and friends do their
own extent locking but for the purposes of dedupe, we want to have both
files locked down across a set of readpage operations (so that we can
compare data). Introduce this variant and a flag which can be set for
This patch adds an ioctl, BTRFS_IOC_FILE_EXTENT_SAME which will try to
de-duplicate a list of extents across a range of files.
Internally, the ioctl re-uses code from the clone ioctl. This avoids
rewriting a large chunk of extent handling code.
Userspace passes in an array of file, offset pairs
Hi Mark,
could you compare (appart from online/offline) your implementation to LiuBo's
work?, appeared on ML a while ago:
http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org/msg23656.html
It would be interesting if the two approaches could share some code, and also
confirmation that
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 12:50:04AM +0200, Marek Otahal wrote: could you
compare (appart from online/offline) your implementation to LiuBo's work?,
appeared on ML a while ago:
http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org/msg23656.html
Well that's the primary difference. Liu Bo's
On 04/16/2013 07:57 PM, David Sterba wrote:
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 03:55:06PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
If one of the copy of the superblock is zero it does not
confirm to us that btrfs isn't there on that disk. When
we are having more than one copy of superblock we should
rather let the for
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 04:17:15PM -0700, Mark Fasheh wrote:
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 12:50:04AM +0200, Marek Otahal wrote: could you
compare (appart from online/offline) your implementation to LiuBo's work?,
appeared on ML a while ago:
47 matches
Mail list logo
