[PATCH] Btrfs: refactor btrfs_extent_same() slightly

From: Omar Sandoval This was originally a prep patch for changing the behavior on len=0, but we went another direction with that. This still makes the function slightly easier to follow. Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo Signed-off-by: Omar Sandoval

gdb log of crashed "btrfs-image -s"

Christoph Groth wrote: Chris Murphy wrote: On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 1:25 PM, Christoph Groth wrote: Any ideas on what could be done? If you need help to debug the problem with btrfs-image, please tell me what I should do. I can keep the broken file system around

[PATCH] Btrfs: constify struct btrfs_{,disk_}key wherever possible

From: Omar Sandoval In a lot of places, it's unclear when it's safe to reuse a struct btrfs_key after it has been passed to a helper function. Constify these arguments wherever possible to make it obvious. Signed-off-by: Omar Sandoval --- This applies to Dave's

Re: [PATCH] xfstests: btrfs/047: check btrfs-convert with extent and non-extent source

On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 07:17:02AM +0530, Lakshmipathi.G wrote: > Signed-off-by: Lakshmipathi.G Need detailed test description in commit log too. > --- > tests/btrfs/047 | 108 > > tests/btrfs/047.out | 1 +

Re: [PATCH] btrfs-progs: fsck-tests: missing csum test script

It's not clear from the test what's the purpose. There's one corrupted csum but the whole csum tree rebuild option is used. This is a pretty basic check that the --init-csum-tree works, so it should be mentioned somewhere in the test script. On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 08:26:36PM +0100,

Re: [PATCH 8/8] Revert "ext4: fix wrong gfp type under transaction"

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 04:18:17PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > OK, so I've been staring into the code and AFAIU current->journal_info > can contain my stored information. I could either hijack part of the > word as the ref counting is only consuming low 12b. But that looks too > ugly to live.

Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM TOPIC] sharing pages between mappings

On Wed 11-01-17 15:13:19, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Jan Kara wrote: > > On Wed 11-01-17 11:29:28, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > >> I know there's work on this for xfs, but could this be done in generic mm > >> code? > >> > >> What are the obstacles?

Re: [PATCH] btfs-progs: fsck-tests: corrupt nlink value test

On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 09:35:52AM -0700, lakshmipath...@giis.co.in wrote: > If btrfs-corrupt-block is in bad shape, then corruption scripts around > them won't help in long term. > > Yes, documentation for btrfs-corrupt-block needs improvement. imo, > re-arranged priority will be like : (5),

Re: [PATCH 1/2] btrfs-progs: cmds-check.c: supports inode nbytes fix in lowmem

Hi, I have some comments, see below. On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 01:38:07PM +0800, Su Yue wrote: > Added 'repair_inode_item' which dispatches functions such as > 'repair_inode__nbytes_lowmem' to correct errors and > 'struct inode_item_fix_info' to store correct values and errors. > > Signed-off-by:

Re: [PATCH 8/8] Revert "ext4: fix wrong gfp type under transaction"

On Tue 17-01-17 09:24:25, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Mon 16-01-17 21:56:07, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 03:11:07PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > From: Michal Hocko > > > > > > This reverts commit 216553c4b7f3e3e2beb4981cddca9b2027523928. Now that > > > the

Re: [LSF/MM ATTEND] blk-mq I/O scheduling, Btrfs, VFS topics

On 01/13/2017 08:24 PM, Omar Sandoval wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to attend LSF/MM again this year to discuss topics in blk-mq, > Btrfs, and the VFS. > > I've been working on the blk-mq I/O scheduling framework [1] with Jens. > Once that is finalized, the next step is a proper multiqueue

Re: [PATCH] btrfs-progs: Corruption-framework: Include inode fields

On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 06:03:58PM +0100, Lakshmipathi.G wrote: > Signed-off-by: Lakshmipathi.G Applied, thanks. -- 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 8/8] Revert "ext4: fix wrong gfp type under transaction"

On Tue 17-01-17 10:59:16, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 04:18:17PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > OK, so I've been staring into the code and AFAIU current->journal_info > > can contain my stored information. I could either hijack part of the > > word as the ref counting is

Re: [PATCH 00/24] tree-log inode vs btrfs_inode cleanups

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 04:00:26PM +0200, Nikolay Borisov wrote: > So here is a new set of patches cleaning up tree-log function > w.r.t inode vs btrfs_inode. There are still some which remain > but I didn't find compelling arguments to cleaning them up, so > I've left them unchanged. This time

Re: [PATCH 8/8] Revert "ext4: fix wrong gfp type under transaction"

On Tue 17-01-17 17:16:19, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > But before going to play with that I am really wondering whether we need > > > all this with no journal at all. AFAIU what Jack told me it is the > > > journal lock(s) which is the biggest problem from the reclaim recursion > > > point of view.

Re: Unocorrectable errors with RAID1

Goldwyn Rodrigues wrote: On 01/17/2017 02:44 AM, Christoph Groth wrote: Goldwyn Rodrigues wrote: Would you be able to upload a btrfs-image for me to examine. This is a core ctree error where most probably item size is incorrectly registered. Sure, I can do that. I'd like to use the -s

Re: [PATCH 2/2] btrfs-progs: cmds-check.c: supports inode isize fix in lowmem

On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 01:38:08PM +0800, Su Yue wrote: > Add a function 'repair_inode_isize' to support inode isize repair. Similar comments to this patch, missng path init and the error message level. > Signed-off-by: Su Yue > --- > cmds-check.c | 49

[PATCHv2 18/24] btrfs: Make btrfs_unlink_inode take btrfs_inode

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov --- fs/btrfs/ctree.h| 2 +- fs/btrfs/inode.c| 58 ++--- fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 14 ++--- 3 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h

[PATCHv2 14/24] btrfs: Make btrfs_log_changed_extents take btrfs_inode

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov --- fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 22 +++--- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c index 0e061f91055e..e293ae0e18d7 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c +++

[PATCHv2 00/24] tree-log inode vs btrfs_inode cleanups

So here is a new set of patches cleaning up tree-log function w.r.t inode vs btrfs_inode. There are still some which remain but I didn't find compelling arguments to cleaning them up, so I've left them unchanged. This time there are some size shrinkage: textdata bss dec hex

[PATCHv2 13/24] btrfs: Make btrfs_get_logged_extents take btrfs_inode

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov --- fs/btrfs/ordered-data.c | 4 ++-- fs/btrfs/ordered-data.h | 2 +- fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 2 +- 3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ordered-data.c b/fs/btrfs/ordered-data.c index

[PATCHv2 08/24] btrfs: Make logged_inode_size take btrfs_inode

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov --- fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c index a7705173150e..20718cfebf89 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c @@

[PATCHv2 23/24] btrfs: Make count_inode_extrefs take btrfs_inode

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov --- fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c index 8c110d0e16c3..47e4f3610348 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c @@

[PATCHv2 12/24] btrfs: Make btrfs_log_trailing_hole take btrfs_inode

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov --- fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 8 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c index 1301c517c2f0..9f2c42016825 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c @@

[PATCHv2 06/24] btrfs: Make btrfs_del_dir_entries_in_log take btrfs_inode

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov --- fs/btrfs/inode.c| 2 +- fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 10 +- fs/btrfs/tree-log.h | 2 +- 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c index 41b1e2ed63b4..ebfeabafe1b1 100644

[PATCHv2 17/24] btrfs: Make log_new_dir_dentries take btrfs_inode

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov --- fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 8 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c index 38cda7869bf9..b0cc56fe86e9 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c @@

[PATCHv2 11/24] btrfs: Make btrfs_log_all_xattrs take btrfs_inode

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov --- fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 10 +- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c index 12872bf492bd..1301c517c2f0 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c @@

Re: [PATCH 2/2] btrfs: replace: Use ref counts to avoid destroying target device when canceled

On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 5:10 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote: When dev-replace and scrub are run at the same time, dev-replace can be canceled by scrub. It's quite common for btrfs/069. While in that case, target device can be destroyed at cancel time, leading to a

Re: Unocorrectable errors with RAID1

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 1:25 PM, Christoph Groth wrote: > Goldwyn Rodrigues wrote: >> >> On 01/17/2017 02:44 AM, Christoph Groth wrote: >>> >>> Goldwyn Rodrigues wrote: >>> Would you be able to upload a btrfs-image for me to examine. This is a core ctree error

Re: [PATCH 8/8] Revert "ext4: fix wrong gfp type under transaction"

On Jan 17, 2017, at 8:59 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 04:18:17PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: >> >> OK, so I've been staring into the code and AFAIU current->journal_info >> can contain my stored information. I could either hijack part of the >> word as the

Re: [PATCH 2/2] btrfs: replace: Use ref counts to avoid destroying target device when canceled

At 01/18/2017 06:47 AM, Josef Bacik wrote: On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 5:10 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote: When dev-replace and scrub are run at the same time, dev-replace can be canceled by scrub. It's quite common for btrfs/069. While in that case, target device can be

[PATCH 1/2] btrfs-progs: quota: fix printing during wait mode

From: Jeff Mahoney If we call "btrfs quota rescan -w", it will attempt to start the rescan operation, wait for it, and then print the "quota rescan started" message. The wait could last an arbitrary amount of time, so printing it after the wait isn't very helpful. This patch

[PATCH 2/2] btrfs-progs: quota: Add -W option to rescan to wait without starting rescan

From: Jeff Mahoney This patch adds a new -W option to wait for a rescan without starting a new operation. This is useful for things like xfstests where we want do to do a "btrfs quota enable" and not continue until the subsequent rescan has finished. In addition to documenting

[PATCH] xfstests: btrfs/047: check btrfs-convert with extent and non-extent source

Signed-off-by: Lakshmipathi.G --- tests/btrfs/047 | 108 tests/btrfs/047.out | 1 + tests/btrfs/group | 1 + 3 files changed, 110 insertions(+) create mode 100755 tests/btrfs/047 create mode 100644

[PATCH v2] btrfs-progs: Fix disable backtrace assert error

Due to commit 00e769d04c2c83029d6c71(btrfs-progs: Correct value printed by assertions/BUG_ON/WARN_ON), which changed the assert_trace() parameter, the condition passed to assert/WARN_ON/BUG_ON are logical notted for backtrace enabled and disabled case. Such behavior makes us easier to pass value

[PATCH v2] btrfs-progs: Fix disable backtrace assert error

Due to commit 00e769d04c2c83029d6c71(btrfs-progs: Correct value printed by assertions/BUG_ON/WARN_ON), which changed the assert_trace() parameter, the condition passed to assert/WARN_ON/BUG_ON are logical notted for backtrace enabled and disabled case. Such behavior makes us easier to pass value

[PATCH v3] btrfs-progs: Fix disable backtrace assert error

Due to commit 00e769d04c2c83029d6c71(btrfs-progs: Correct value printed by assertions/BUG_ON/WARN_ON), which changed the assert_trace() parameter, the condition passed to assert/WARN_ON/BUG_ON are logical notted for backtrace enabled and disabled case. Such behavior makes us easier to pass value

Re: corruption: yet another one after deleting a ro snapshot

At 01/17/2017 06:39 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: Am 17. Januar 2017 09:53:19 MEZ schrieb Qu Wenruo : Just lowmem false alert, as extent-tree dump shows complete fine result. I'll CC you and adds your reported-by tag when there is any update on this case.

Re: corruption: yet another one after deleting a ro snapshot

On Wed, 2017-01-18 at 08:41 +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > Since we have your extent tree and root tree dump, I think we should > be  > able to build a image to reproduce the case. +1 > BTW, your fs is too large for us to really do some verification or > other  > work. Sure I know... but that's

[PATCHv2 19/24] btrfs: Make drop_one_dir_item take btrfs_inode

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov --- fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 10 +- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c index b2c0a30811f6..35434d686653 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c @@

[PATCHv2 01/24] btrfs: Make btrfs_must_commit_transaction take btrfs_inode

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov --- fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 18 +- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c index b814cd7bbe70..a2a822a993af 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c +++

[PATCHv2 09/24] btrfs: Make btrfs_check_ref_name_override take btrfs_inode

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov --- fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 9 - 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c index 20718cfebf89..7669e95be423 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c @@

[PATCHv2 02/24] btrfs: Make btrfs_record_unlink_dir take btrfs_inode

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov --- fs/btrfs/inode.c| 8 fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 18 +- fs/btrfs/tree-log.h | 2 +- 3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c index

[PATCHv2 15/24] btrfs: Make log_dir_items take btrfs_inode

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov --- fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c index e293ae0e18d7..8d7197a0eceb 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c @@

[PATCHv2 10/24] btrfs: Make copy_items take btrfs_inode

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov --- fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 40 +++- 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c index 7669e95be423..12872bf492bd 100644 ---

[PATCHv2 24/24] btrfs: Make count_inode_refs take btrfs_inode

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov --- fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c index 47e4f3610348..a16da4a3ab63 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c @@

[PATCHv2 21/24] btrfs: Make log_inode_item take btrfs_inode

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov --- fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 9 - 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c index d919cd4252ba..1348ab5e3229 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c @@

[PATCHv2 07/24] btrfs: Make btrfs_del_inode_ref take btrfs_inode

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov --- fs/btrfs/inode.c| 2 +- fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 10 +- fs/btrfs/tree-log.h | 2 +- 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c index ebfeabafe1b1..e86b08eabb82 100644

[PATCHv2 04/24] btrfs: Make btrfs_inode_in_log take btrfs_inode

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov --- fs/btrfs/btrfs_inode.h | 16 +++- fs/btrfs/file.c| 2 +- fs/btrfs/inode.c | 16 fs/btrfs/tree-log.c| 4 ++-- 4 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) diff --git

[PATCHv2 20/24] btrfs: Make __add_inode_ref take btrfs_inode

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov --- fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 26 -- 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c index 35434d686653..d919cd4252ba 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c +++

[PATCHv2 05/24] btrfs: Make btrfs_log_new_name take btrfs_inode

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov --- fs/btrfs/inode.c| 8 fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 18 -- fs/btrfs/tree-log.h | 2 +- 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c index

[PATCHv2 22/24] btrfs: Make btrfs_log_inode take btrfs_inode

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov --- fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 92 ++--- 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c index 1348ab5e3229..8c110d0e16c3 100644 ---

[PATCHv2 16/24] btrfs: Make log_directory_changes take btrfs_inode

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov --- fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 9 - 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c index 8d7197a0eceb..38cda7869bf9 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c @@

Re: Unocorrectable errors with RAID1

Chris Murphy wrote: On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 1:25 PM, Christoph Groth wrote: Any ideas on what could be done? If you need help to debug the problem with btrfs-image, please tell me what I should do. I can keep the broken file system around until an image can be

[PATCHv2 03/24] btrfs: Make btrfs_record_snapshot_destroy take btrfs_inode

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov --- fs/btrfs/ioctl.c| 2 +- fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 8 fs/btrfs/tree-log.h | 2 +- 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c index e8e1f5f5f93a..7d1b5378de49 100644 ---

Re: Unocorrectable errors with RAID1

On 01/17/2017 02:25 PM, Christoph Groth wrote: > Goldwyn Rodrigues wrote: >> On 01/17/2017 02:44 AM, Christoph Groth wrote: >>> Goldwyn Rodrigues wrote: >>> Would you be able to upload a btrfs-image for me to examine. This is a core ctree error where most probably item size is

Re: Unocorrectable errors with RAID1

Goldwyn Rodrigues wrote: As Chris mentioned, try a later version. If you are familiar with git, you could even try the devel version. Looking at the commits in current devel (2f4a73f9a612876116) since v4.9, there doesn't seem to be anything relevant, but I can retry, if you think it's

Re: [PATCH 8/8] Revert "ext4: fix wrong gfp type under transaction"

On Mon 16-01-17 21:56:07, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 03:11:07PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > From: Michal Hocko > > > > This reverts commit 216553c4b7f3e3e2beb4981cddca9b2027523928. Now that > > the transaction context uses memalloc_nofs_save and all

Re: Unocorrectable errors with RAID1

Goldwyn Rodrigues wrote: Would you be able to upload a btrfs-image for me to examine. This is a core ctree error where most probably item size is incorrectly registered. Sure, I can do that. I'd like to use the -s option, will this be fine? Is there some preferred place for the upload?

Re: corruption: yet another one after deleting a ro snapshot

At 01/17/2017 06:07 AM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: On Mon, 2017-01-16 at 13:47 +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: And I highly suspect if the subvolume 6403 is the RO snapshot you just removed. I guess there is no way to find out whether it was that snapshot, is there? "btrfs subvolume list"

Re: Unocorrectable errors with RAID1

Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: There's not really much in the way of great documentation that I know of. I can however cover the basics here: (...) Thanks for this explanation. I'm sure it will be also useful to others. If the chunk to be allocated was a data chunk, you get -ENOSPC

Re: Unocorrectable errors with RAID1

On 2017-01-16 23:50, Janos Toth F. wrote: BTRFS uses a 2 level allocation system. At the higher level, you have chunks. These are just big blocks of space on the disk that get used for only one type of lower level allocation (Data, Metadata, or System). Data chunks are normally 1GB, Metadata

Re: Unocorrectable errors with RAID1

On 2017-01-17 04:18, Christoph Groth wrote: Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: There's not really much in the way of great documentation that I know of. I can however cover the basics here: (...) Thanks for this explanation. I'm sure it will be also useful to others. Glad I could help. If

Re: Unocorrectable errors with RAID1

On 01/17/2017 02:44 AM, Christoph Groth wrote: > Goldwyn Rodrigues wrote: > >> Would you be able to upload a btrfs-image for me to examine. This is a >> core ctree error where most probably item size is incorrectly registered. > > Sure, I can do that. I'd like to use the -s option, will this

Re: corruption: yet another one after deleting a ro snapshot

Am 17. Januar 2017 09:53:19 MEZ schrieb Qu Wenruo : >Just lowmem false alert, as extent-tree dump shows complete fine >result. > >I'll CC you and adds your reported-by tag when there is any update on >this case. Fine, just one thing left right more from my side on this

Re: [PATCH] btrfs-progs: Corruption-framework: Include inode nlink field

On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 11:08:32AM +0100, Lakshmipathi.G wrote: > Patch with fix for David Sterba review comment. > > Signed-off-by: Lakshmipathi.G Applied, thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to

[PATCH] btrfs-progs: lowmem-check: Fix false alert on dropped leaf

For btrfs-progs test case 021-partially-dropped-snapshot-case, if the first leaf is already dropped, btrfs check low-memory mode will report false alert: checking fs roots checksum verify failed on 29917184 found E4E3BDB6 wanted checksum verify failed on 29917184 found E4E3BDB6 wanted