[PATCH] btrfs: Drop inode if inode root is NULL

2013-06-06 Thread naota
There is a path where btrfs_drop_inode() is called with its inode's root is NULL: In btrfs_new_inode(), when btrfs_set_inode_index() fails, iput() is called. We should handle this case before taking look at the root-root_item. Signed-off-by: Naohiro Aota na...@elisp.net --- fs/btrfs/inode.c | 3

Re: [PATCH] btrfs: Drop inode if inode root is NULL

2013-06-06 Thread Miao Xie
On thu, 06 Jun 2013 18:56:34 +0900, na...@elisp.net wrote: There is a path where btrfs_drop_inode() is called with its inode's root is NULL: In btrfs_new_inode(), when btrfs_set_inode_index() fails, iput() is called. We should handle this case before taking look at the root-root_item.

[PATCH] btrfs: fix the code comments for LZO compression workspace

2013-06-06 Thread Jeff Liu
From: Jie Liu jeff@oracle.com Fix the code comments for lzo compression workspace. The buf item is used to store the decompressed data and cbuf is used to store the compressed data. Signed-off-by: Jie Liu jeff@oracle.com --- fs/btrfs/lzo.c |4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs-progs: Validate super block checksum

2013-06-06 Thread Filipe David Manana
Hello, Any feedback? thanks On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Filipe David Borba Manana fdman...@gmail.com wrote: After finding a super block in a device also validate its checksum. This validation is done in the kernel but it was missing in btrfs-progs. The function btrfs_check_super_csum()

Re: [PATCH 0/6] fix INT_MAX readdir hang, plus cleanups

2013-06-06 Thread David Sterba
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 09:35:07AM +0800, Miao Xie wrote: Onwed, 5 Jun 2013 15:36:36 +0200, David Sterba wrote: On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 10:34:08AM +0800, Miao Xie wrote: On tue, 4 Jun 2013 16:26:57 -0700, Zach Brown wrote: On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 07:16:53PM -0400, Chris Mason

Re: [PATCH 0/6] fix INT_MAX readdir hang, plus cleanups

2013-06-06 Thread Chris Mason
Quoting David Sterba (2013-06-06 09:55:50) On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 09:35:07AM +0800, Miao Xie wrote: Onwed, 5 Jun 2013 15:36:36 +0200, David Sterba wrote: On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 10:34:08AM +0800, Miao Xie wrote: On tue, 4 Jun 2013 16:26:57 -0700, Zach Brown wrote: On Tue,

[PATCH] Btrfs: don't delete fs_roots until after we cleanup the transaction

2013-06-06 Thread Josef Bacik
We get a use after free if we had a transaction to cleanup since there could be delayed inodes which refer to their respective fs_root. Thanks Reported-by: David Sterba dste...@suse.cz Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik jba...@fusionio.com --- fs/btrfs/disk-io.c |2 +- 1 files changed, 1

[PATCH] xfstests btrfs/314: test send / receive

2013-06-06 Thread Jan Schmidt
Basic send / receive functionality test for btrfs. Requires current version of fsstress built (-x support). Relies on fssum tool, which is not part of the test suite but can skip the test if it is missing. Signed-off-by: Jan Schmidt list@jan-o-sch.net --- README |3 +

Claims

2013-06-06 Thread FROM THE UNITED NATION ENVOY
UNITED NATION ENVOY HAVE AWARDED TO YOUR EMAIL THE SUM OF $375,000.00 USD Email contact: unitednationen...@yahoo.com.hk -- 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

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: fix broken nocow after balance

2013-06-06 Thread Kyle Gates
On Monday, June 03, 2013, Liu Bo wrote: Balance will create reloc_root for each fs root, and it's going to record last_snapshot to filter shared blocks. The side effect of setting last_snapshot is to break nocow attributes of files. So it turns out that checking last_snapshot does not always

Claims

2013-06-06 Thread FROM THE UNITED NATION ENVOY
UNITED NATION ENVOY HAVE AWARDED TO YOUR EMAIL THE SUM OF $375,000.00 USD Email contact: unitednationen...@yahoo.com.hk -- 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

[PATCH] Btrfs: exclude logged extents before replying when we are mixed

2013-06-06 Thread Josef Bacik
With non-mixed block groups we replay the logs before we're allowed to do any writes, so we get away with not pinning/removing the data extents until right when we replay them. However with mixed block groups we allocate out of the same pool, so we could easily allocate a metadata block that was

Re: [PATCH] xfstests btrfs/314: test send / receive

2013-06-06 Thread Josef Bacik
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 09:20:33AM -0600, Jan Schmidt wrote: Basic send / receive functionality test for btrfs. Requires current version of fsstress built (-x support). Relies on fssum tool, which is not part of the test suite but can skip the test if it is missing. Signed-off-by: Jan

Re: [PATCH] xfstests btrfs/314: test send / receive

2013-06-06 Thread Eric Sandeen
On 6/6/13 10:20 AM, Jan Schmidt wrote: Basic send / receive functionality test for btrfs. Requires current version of fsstress built (-x support). Relies on fssum tool, which is not part of the test suite but can skip the test if it is missing. Signed-off-by: Jan Schmidt

Re: [PATCH 1/2] list: add list_for_each_entry_del

2013-06-06 Thread Andy Shevchenko
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 8:28 PM, Joern Engel jo...@logfs.org wrote: I have seen a lot of boilerplate code that either follows the pattern of while (!list_empty(head)) { pos = list_entry(head-next, struct foo, list); list_del(pos-list);

Re: [PATCH 1/2] list: add list_for_each_entry_del

2013-06-06 Thread Jörn Engel
On Thu, 6 June 2013 22:32:55 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 8:28 PM, Joern Engel jo...@logfs.org wrote: I have seen a lot of boilerplate code that either follows the pattern of while (!list_empty(head)) { pos = list_entry(head-next, struct foo,

Re: [PATCH 1/2] list: add list_for_each_entry_del

2013-06-06 Thread Andy Shevchenko
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 9:12 PM, Jörn Engel jo...@logfs.org wrote: On Thu, 6 June 2013 22:32:55 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 8:28 PM, Joern Engel jo...@logfs.org wrote: I have seen a lot of boilerplate code that either follows the pattern of while

Re: Possible solution to the open_ctree boot bug ...

2013-06-06 Thread Kai Krakow
George Mitchell geo...@chinilu.com schrieb: I am seeing a huge improvement in boot performance since doing a system wide file by file defragementation of metadata. In fact in the four sequential boots since completing this process, I have not seen one open_ctree failure so far. This leads

Re: Possible solution to the open_ctree boot bug ...

2013-06-06 Thread George Mitchell
On 06/06/2013 01:58 PM, Kai Krakow wrote: George Mitchell geo...@chinilu.com schrieb: I am seeing a huge improvement in boot performance since doing a system wide file by file defragementation of metadata. In fact in the four sequential boots since completing this process, I have not seen one

btrfsck: free-space-cache.c:813: btrfs_add_free_space: Assertion `!(ret == -17)' failed

2013-06-06 Thread Andrea Gelmini
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):

Re: btrfsck: free-space-cache.c:813: btrfs_add_free_space: Assertion `!(ret == -17)' failed

2013-06-06 Thread Josef Bacik
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 07:00:50PM -0600, Andrea Gelmini wrote: 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

[PATCH] btrfs-progs: Add chunk corrupt funtion to btrfs-corrupt-block

2013-06-06 Thread Qu Wenruo
Add chunk corrupt function to btrfs-corrupt-block. This funtion can be used to delete or corrupt a given chunk or the whole chunk tree. This funtion is useful to test the coming chunk recover funtion. BTW, since the chunk recover funtion is based on whole partion scanning, so the COW should be

How do I safely terminate COW on pre-existing files?

2013-06-06 Thread George Mitchell
I want to eliminate the COW feature on all of my OS files. It is a nice feature for user files, but I don't see a clear benefit for the actual OS files. And I suspect that COW induced fragmentation is causing or aggravating problems with my system including the boot open_ctree problem. I

Re: btrfsck: free-space-cache.c:813: btrfs_add_free_space: Assertion `!(ret == -17)' failed

2013-06-06 Thread Andrea Gelmini
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