On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Davide Italiano dccitali...@gmail.com wrote:
- We call inode_size_ok() only if FL_KEEP_SIZE isn't specified.
- As an optimisation we can skip the call if (off + len)
isn't greater than the current size of the file. This operation
is called under the lock so
Hi folks,
Reporting this here too as per the How do I report bugs and issues?
section on the wiki.
I managed to trigger the following BUG_ON() whilst running 'apt purge':-
[ 85.635305] kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/ctree.c:3163!
[ 85.635350] invalid opcode: [#1] SMP
[ 85.635398] Modules
See also https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96971
I've identified some problems in the btrfs code and attached a
btrfs-image which causes the userland tools to crash and the kernel to
immediately freeze once the filesystem get's mounted and one of the
files is accessed. Putting the
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 06:07:09AM +, Duncan wrote:
4.0 is out. There's reason people may want to stick one version back by
default, to 3.19 currently, since it can take a few weeks for early
reports to develop into a coherent problem, and sticking one stable
series back allows for
Thanks for review.
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 10:47 PM, Eric Sandeen sand...@redhat.com wrote:
On 4/20/15 12:33 AM, xuw2...@gmail.com wrote:
From: George Wang xuw2...@gmail.com
snip
This means the value _IOW* will be negative when we store it in the int
variables. Such as the
As long as the inode is intact, the file metadata can be restored.
Directory data is restored at the end of search_dir. Errors are
checked and returned, unless ignore_errors is requested.
Signed-off-by: Dan Merillat dan.meril...@gmail.com
---
Documentation/btrfs-restore.txt | 3 ++
Changes since v1:
* Documented in the manpage
* Added to usage() for btrfs restore
* Made it an optional flag (-m/--restore-metadata)
* Use endian-safe macros to access the on-disk data.
* Restore the proper mtime instead of atime twice.
* Restore owner and mode
* Restore metadata for directories
From: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
v1-v2: Oh no. Typo while fixing typo. oops ! thanks Duncan.
Documentation/btrfs-device.txt | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/btrfs-device.txt
Original Message
Subject: Carefully crafted BTRFS-image causes kernel to crash
From: Lukas Lueg lukas.l...@gmail.com
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Date: 2015年04月21日 07:04
See also https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96971
I've identified some problems in the
Anand Jain posted on Mon, 20 Apr 2015 18:31:29 +0800 as excerpted:
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
Documentation/btrfs-device.txt | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/btrfs-device.txt
b/Documentation/btrfs-device.txt index
Hi,
the last one added missing goto. I'll try to make clear differences
next time :)
--
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
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 02:48:55AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 10:46:49AM +0100, David Howells wrote:
NeilBrown ne...@suse.de wrote:
Missing patch 2 of the 3-patch series?
Yes. :-)
Do ext4 and xfs support this, do you know?
Yes. As do f2fs, ocfs2,
Oh, I didn't see there were similar link in the wiki, my bad.
Thank you for your prompt answer :)
Olivier.
On 4/20/2015 12:27 PM, Hugo Mills wrote:
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 12:16:33PM +0200, Némoz Saint-Dizier, Olivier wrote:
Hello everyone,
I have an issue with my ssd where a btrfs partition
On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 12:16:33 +0200, Némoz Saint-Dizier, Olivier wrote:
Hello everyone,
I have an issue with my ssd where a btrfs partition is located. I have a
/dev/sdb1 in ext4 for the /boot, and the rest of the ssd is /dev/sdb2
which is the root of my Archlinux. When I boot, it hangs up
On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 9:15 PM, Joel Best joelb...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all, We have recently had major issues with our large btrfs volume
crashing and remounting read-only because it thinks it's out of space. The
volume is 55TB on h/w raid 6 with 44TB free and the server is running Ubuntu
This patch introduces new option devid for the command
btrfs device delete device_path|devid[..] mnt
In a user reported issue on a 3-disk-RAID1, one disk failed with its
SB unreadable. Now with this patch user will have a choice to delete
the device using devid.
The other method we could do,
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
cmds-replace.c | 11 ---
utils-lib.c| 11 +++
utils.h| 1 +
3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/cmds-replace.c b/cmds-replace.c
index 63d34f9..6ea7c61 100644
--- a/cmds-replace.c
+++
Current method to identify and verify the user provided device_path
needs device SB to be accessible. In situations where SB isn't accessible
or read fails. Using devid will help.
Anand Jain (1):
Btrfs: device delete by devid
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 50
On 31/03/2015 19:05, David Sterba wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 05:09:52PM +0200, Marc Cousin wrote:
So it would be good to sample the active threads and see where it's
spending the time. It could be the somewhere in the rb-tree representing
extents, but that's a guess.
I just need to be
NeilBrown ne...@suse.de wrote:
I managed to reproduce the bug, and when I applied your patches I cannot any
more. So it looks like you've fixed it - thanks.
I hope so too. Now I just hope Linus takes the patches.
That just leave the bmap issue. I'll post a patch which causes lseek to be
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 10:46:49AM +0100, David Howells wrote:
NeilBrown ne...@suse.de wrote:
Missing patch 2 of the 3-patch series?
Yes. :-)
Do ext4 and xfs support this, do you know?
Yes. As do f2fs, ocfs2, gfs2, ceph and NFSv4.2
David
---end quoted text---
--
To unsubscribe
NeilBrown ne...@suse.de wrote:
@@ -721,24 +733,45 @@ int cachefiles_read_or_alloc_pages(struct
fscache_retrieval *op,
We can actually do better than this what you've done here for
cachefiles_read_or_alloc_pages(). We can use SEEK_DATA to check the beginning
of a run of pages and then
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 04:27:00PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
A worthwhile goal, but I certainly wouldn't consider pursuing it until what I
have submitted so far as been accepted - let's not reject good while
waiting for perfect.
It's still broken. You add conditional flag for the almost right
NeilBrown ne...@suse.de wrote:
Missing patch 2 of the 3-patch series?
Yes. :-)
Do ext4 and xfs support this, do you know?
David
--
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
Use inode_set_flags() instead of set_mask_bits() according to
commit 5f16f3225b062 (ext4: atomically set inode-i_flags in
ext4_set_inode_flags()).
Signed-off-by: Zhang Zhen zhenzhang.zh...@huawei.com
---
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 5 ++---
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git
This introduces BTRFS_IOC_RM_DEV_V2, which can accept devid as
an argument to delete the device.
Current only choice to is to pass device path for the device delete
cli, but if btrfs is unable to read device SB, then cli fails. And
user won't be able to delete the device.
With this patch now the
NeilBrown ne...@suse.de wrote:
+ .fs_flags = FS_REQUIRES_DEV | FS_BINARY_MOUNTDATA |
+ FS_SUPPORTS_SEEK_HOLE,
I must be missing something:
warthoggit merge linus/master
Already up-to-date.
warthogstg id
Hello everyone,
I have an issue with my ssd where a btrfs partition is located. I have a
/dev/sdb1 in ext4 for the /boot, and the rest of the ssd is /dev/sdb2
which is the root of my Archlinux. When I boot, it hangs up after
loading the kernel. So I tried with an Archlinux liveboot, and I have
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
---
Documentation/btrfs-device.txt | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/btrfs-device.txt b/Documentation/btrfs-device.txt
index 4bb5ea5..0bc1be3 100644
--- a/Documentation/btrfs-device.txt
+++
Use inode_set_flags() instead of set_mask_bits() according to
commit 5f16f3225b062 (ext4: atomically set inode-i_flags in
ext4_set_inode_flags()).
Signed-off-by: Zhang Zhen zhenzhang.zh...@huawei.com
---
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 5 ++---
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git
On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 09:47:42 +0100 David Howells dhowe...@redhat.com wrote:
NeilBrown ne...@suse.de wrote:
+ .fs_flags = FS_REQUIRES_DEV | FS_BINARY_MOUNTDATA |
+ FS_SUPPORTS_SEEK_HOLE,
I must be missing something:
warthoggit merge linus/master
On 20-04-15 06:27, Zygo Blaxell wrote:
I'm curious as to whether +C has any effect on BTRFS's durability, too.
I would expect it to be strictly equal to or worse than the CoW
durability.
In addition to the stuff pointed out, I've wondered about this:
PostgreSQL full_page_writes copies 8k
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 12:16:33PM +0200, Némoz Saint-Dizier, Olivier wrote:
Hello everyone,
I have an issue with my ssd where a btrfs partition is located. I have a
/dev/sdb1 in ext4 for the /boot, and the rest of the ssd is /dev/sdb2
which is the root of my Archlinux. When I boot, it hangs
On 20-04-2015 15:07, Sander wrote:
Miguel Negrão wrote (ao):
- Given that I'm running a laptop and comunicating with the harddrives via
USB, is it expected that I will get some corruption from time to time or is
this abnormal
Abnormal. I have three Intel ssd's usb connected to an Arndale.
On 4/20/15 12:33 AM, xuw2...@gmail.com wrote:
From: George Wang xuw2...@gmail.com
PPC64 arch use such following IOC values
\#define _IOC_NONE 1U
\#define _IOC_READ 2U
\#define _IOC_WRITE 4U
comparing to the default IOC values
\#define _IOC_NONE 0U
\#define
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 10:27:05AM +, Hugo Mills wrote:
See the first issue here: https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Gotchas
Hi Hugo, looking at the page again, I see
bcache + btrfs does not seem to be stable yet
linking to a thread more than 2 years old and btrfs kernels that
Miguel Negrão wrote (ao):
- Given that I'm running a laptop and comunicating with the harddrives via
USB, is it expected that I will get some corruption from time to time or is
this abnormal
Abnormal. I have three Intel ssd's usb connected to an Arndale. Two of
them have luks and btrfs raid0
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 02:15:47PM +, sri wrote:
Hi,
I have a subvolume with only one file (file.txt) with 5Mb size.
under /btrfs/subvol1/
1)
I have created 1st snapshot /btrfs/snap1_subvol1. Then I ran btrfs
send and given -f out1.img
size of out1.img is 5Mb.
2)
Next, I have
Hi,
I have a subvolume with only one file (file.txt) with 5Mb size.
under /btrfs/subvol1/
1)
I have created 1st snapshot /btrfs/snap1_subvol1. Then I ran btrfs
send and given -f out1.img
size of out1.img is 5Mb.
2)
Next, I have appended 1Mb data to file.txt
And again created snapshot
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 10:13:47AM +0200, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
On 20-04-15 06:27, Zygo Blaxell wrote:
I'm curious as to whether +C has any effect on BTRFS's durability, too.
I would expect it to be strictly equal to or worse than the CoW
durability.
In addition to the stuff
I'm one of those that used to have problems with btrfs on top of bcache.
After some corruptions, I gave up this setup.
Recently (from February, I think) I gave it another shot, and I have
had no problems since.
I use bcache in writeback mode, with very good performance. I'm
feeling btrfs very
Here's a test patch that makes better use of SEEK_DATA/SEEK_HOLE in
cachefiles_read_or_alloc_pages() by caching data/hole information to use on
the subsequent pages in the list.
Note that the pages list needs to be transited in reverse for this to work as
it seems that the list passed to the fs
On Mon, 2015-04-20 at 05:23 +, Duncan wrote:
Which, given the common developer wisdom about premature optimization,
can be explained. But accepting that explanation, one is still stymied
by the fact that all the previous warnings about btrfs being in heavy
development, keep good
Zygo Blaxell posted on Mon, 20 Apr 2015 00:27:31 -0400 as excerpted:
Normal writes to btrfs filesystems using the versioned filesystem tree
are consistent(ish), atomic, and durable; however, they have high
latency as the filesystem normally delays commit until triggered by a
periodic timer
On 04/20/2015 01:27 AM, NeilBrown wrote:
This allows fscache to cachefiles in a btrfs filesystem.
Thanks for working on this Neil.
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason c...@fb.com
-chris
Signed-off-by: NeilBrown ne...@suse.de
---
fs/btrfs/super.c |3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1
Please just usse SEEK_HOLE/DATA support unconditioanlly. -bmap is a
horrible hack that is completely unsafe.
--
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
On Sun, 19 Apr 2015 23:08:18 -0700 Christoph Hellwig h...@infradead.org
wrote:
Please just usse SEEK_HOLE/DATA support unconditioanlly. -bmap is a
horrible hack that is completely unsafe.
A worthwhile goal, but I certainly wouldn't consider pursuing it until what I
have submitted so far as
47 matches
Mail list logo
