Re: bio linked list corruption.

On 10/26/2016 04:00 PM, Chris Mason wrote: > > > On 10/26/2016 03:06 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 11:42 AM, Dave Jones <da...@codemonkey.org.uk> wrote: >>> >>> The stacks show nearly all of them are stuck in sync_inodes_sb &

Re: btrfs bio linked list corruption.

On 10/11/2016 11:19 AM, Dave Jones wrote: On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 04:11:39PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 10:45:08AM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > > This is from Linus' current tree, with Al's iovec fixups on top. > > Those iovec fixups are in the current tree... ah yeah,

[GIT PULL] Btrfs

ix a possible umount deadlock Lu Fengqi (1) commits (+369/-10): btrfs: fix check_shared for fiemap ioctl Chris Mason (1) commits (+15/-11): Revert "btrfs: let btrfs_delete_unused_bgs() to clean relocated bgs" Masahiro Yamada (1) commits (+8/-28): btrfs: squash lines for simpl

Re: btrfs bio linked list corruption.

On 10/11/2016 10:45 AM, Dave Jones wrote: > This is from Linus' current tree, with Al's iovec fixups on top. > > [ cut here ] > WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 3673 at lib/list_debug.c:33 __list_add+0x89/0xb0 > list_add corruption. prev->next should be next (e8806648), but

Re: btrfs bio linked list corruption.

On 10/13/2016 02:16 PM, Dave Jones wrote: On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:42:46AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote: > On 10/12/2016 10:40 AM, Dave Jones wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 09:47:17AM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 11:54:09AM -0400,

Re: btrfs bio linked list corruption.

On 10/12/2016 10:40 AM, Dave Jones wrote: On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 09:47:17AM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 11:54:09AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote: > > > > > > On 10/11/2016 10:45 AM, Dave Jones wrote: > > > This is from Linus' curren

Re: [PATCH] btrfs: limit async_work allocation and worker func duration

On 12/12/2016 03:35 PM, Maxim Patlasov wrote: On 12/12/2016 06:54 AM, David Sterba wrote: As far as we don't have any NO_THRESHOLD users of btrfs_workqueue_normal_congested for now, I tend to think it's better to add a descriptive comment and simply return "false" from

Re: OOM: Better, but still there on 4.9

On 12/16/2016 02:39 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: [CC linux-mm and btrfs guys] On Thu 15-12-16 23:57:04, Nils Holland wrote: [...] Of course, none of this are workloads that are new / special in any way - prior to 4.8, I never experienced any issues doing the exact same things. Dec 15 19:02:16

[GIT PULL] Btrfs

in btrfs_should_throttle_delayed_refs() (+1/-1) btrfs: add necessary comments about tickets_id (+4/-0) btrfs: improve delayed refs iterations (+37/-6) Liu Bo (2) commits (+12/-6): Btrfs: adjust len of writes if following a preallocated extent (+5/-3) Btrfs: fix BUG_ON in btrfs_ma

Re: OOM: Better, but still there on 4.9

On 12/16/2016 02:39 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: [CC linux-mm and btrfs guys] On Thu 15-12-16 23:57:04, Nils Holland wrote: [...] Of course, none of this are workloads that are new / special in any way - prior to 4.8, I never experienced any issues doing the exact same things. Dec 15 19:02:16

[GIT PULL] Btrfs fixes

Hi Linus, Dave Sterba queued up a few fixes for btrfs. I have them in my for-linus-4.10 branch: These are all over the place. The tracepoint part of the pull fixes a crash and adds a little more information to two tracepoints, while the rest are good old fashioned fixes.

Re: [Regression 4.7-rc1] btrfs: bugfix: handle FS_IOC32_{GETFLAGS,SETFLAGS,GETVERSION} in btrfs_ioctl

On 01/06/2017 12:22 PM, Joseph Salisbury wrote: Hi Luke, A kernel bug report was opened against Ubuntu [0]. This bug was fixed by the following commit in v4.7-rc1: commit 4c63c2454eff996c5e27991221106eb511f7db38 Author: Luke Dashjr Date: Thu Oct 29 08:22:21 2015 +

Re: OOM: Better, but still there on

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 12:16:53PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: On Wed 21-12-16 20:00:38, Tetsuo Handa wrote: One thing to note here, when we are talking about 32b kernel, things have changed in 4.8 when we moved from the zone based to node based reclaim (see b2e18757f2c9 ("mm, vmscan: begin

Re: OOM: Better, but still there on 4.9

On 12/16/2016 05:14 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: On Fri 16-12-16 13:15:18, Chris Mason wrote: On 12/16/2016 02:39 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: [...] I believe the right way to go around this is to pursue what I've started in [1]. I will try to prepare something for testing today for you. Stay tuned

[GIT PULL] Btrfs

Hi Linus We have a small set of fixes for the next RC: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus-4.11 Zygo tracked down a very old bug with inline compressed extents. I didn't tag this one for stable because I want to do individual tested backports. It's

[GIT PULL] Btrfs

Hi Linus, We have 3 small fixes queued up in my for-linus-4.11 branch: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus-4.11 Goldwyn Rodrigues (1) commits (+7/-7): btrfs: Change qgroup_meta_rsv to 64bit Dan Carpenter (1) commits (+6/-1): Btrfs: fix an

Re: [PATCH] jump_label: Fix anonymous union initialization

ough, jump labels are not for 4.4". Although, didn't goto asm get added into 4.5? Did someone backport it to the gcc 4.4 compilers? I believe 4.5 handles anonymous unions. Since the broken commit went through my tree, I'll take this patch. I'm getting ready for another git pull request to

[GIT PULL] Btrfs

Hi Linus, My for-linus-4.11 branch: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus-4.11 Has Btrfs round two. These are mostly a continuation of Dave Sterba's collection of cleanups, but Filipe also has some bug fixes and performance improvements. Nikolay

[GIT PULL] Btrfs

Hi Linus Dave Sterba collected a few more fixes for the last rc: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus-4.11 These aren't marked for stable, but I'm putting them in with a batch were testing/sending by hand for this release. Liu Bo (3) commits

Re: [PATCH v5 2/5] lib: Add zstd modules

On 08/10/2017 03:25 PM, Hugo Mills wrote: On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 01:41:21PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote: On 08/10/2017 04:30 AM, Eric Biggers wrote: Theses benchmarks are misleading because they compress the whole file as a single stream without resetting the dictionary, which isn't how data

Re: [PATCH v5 2/5] lib: Add zstd modules

On 08/10/2017 04:30 AM, Eric Biggers wrote: On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 07:35:53PM -0700, Nick Terrell wrote: The memory reported is the amount of memory the compressor requests. | Method | Size (B) | Time (s) | Ratio | MB/s| Adj MB/s | Mem (MB) |

Re: [PATCH v5 2/5] lib: Add zstd modules

On 08/10/2017 03:00 PM, Eric Biggers wrote: On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 01:41:21PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote: On 08/10/2017 04:30 AM, Eric Biggers wrote: On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 07:35:53PM -0700, Nick Terrell wrote: The memory reported is the amount of memory the compressor requests. | Method

Re: Moving ndctl development into the kernel tree?

On 07/22/2017 02:49 PM, Dan Williams wrote: On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 7:52 PM, Dan Williams wrote: [ adding Chris ] On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 4:44 PM, Dan Williams wrote: On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 3:58 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:

Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched/fair: Always propagate runnable_load_avg

On 04/25/2017 04:49 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 11:49:41AM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote: Will try that too. I can't see why HT would change it because I see single CPU queues misevaluated. Just in case, you need to tune the test params so that it doesn't load the machine too much

[GIT PULL] Btrfs

Hi Linus, We have one more for btrfs: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus-4.11 This is dropping a new WARN_ON from rc1 that ended up making more noise than we really want. The larger fix for the underflow got delayed a bit and it's better for now

Re: [PATCH] btrfs: always write superblocks synchronously

On 05/03/2017 04:36 AM, Jan Kara wrote: On Tue 02-05-17 09:28:13, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: Commit b685d3d65ac7 "block: treat REQ_FUA and REQ_PREFLUSH as synchronous" removed REQ_SYNC flag from WRITE_FUA implementation. Since REQ_FUA and REQ_FLUSH flags are stripped from submitted IO when the

[GIT PULL] Btrfs

) btrfs: No need to check !(flags & MS_RDONLY) twice (+1/-2) Chris Mason (1) commits (+2/-2): btrfs: fix the gfp_mask for the reada_zones radix tree Adam Borowski (1) commits (+9/-3): btrfs: fix a bogus warning when converting only data or metadata Deepa Dinamani (1) commits (+

Re: [GIT PULL] Btrfs

On 05/09/2017 01:56 PM, Chris Mason wrote: > Hi Linus, > > My for-linus-4.12 branch: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git > for-linus-4.12 I hit send too soon, sorry. There's a trivial conflict with our WARN_ON fix that went in

Re: hackbench vs select_idle_sibling; was: [tip:sched/core] sched/fair, cpumask: Export for_each_cpu_wrap()

On 05/17/2017 06:53 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 02:03:11AM -0700, tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra wrote: sched/fair, cpumask: Export for_each_cpu_wrap() -static int cpumask_next_wrap(int n, const struct cpumask *mask, int start, int *wrapped) -{ - next =

[GIT PULL] Btrfs

Hi Linus, My for-linus-4.12 branch has some fixes that Dave Sterba collected: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus-4.12 We've been hitting an early enospc problem on production machines that Omar tracked down to an old int->u64 mistake. I waited a bit

Re: hackbench vs select_idle_sibling; was: [tip:sched/core] sched/fair, cpumask: Export for_each_cpu_wrap()

On 06/06/2017 05:21 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 02:00:21PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote: On Fri, 19 May, at 04:00:35PM, Matt Fleming wrote: On Wed, 17 May, at 12:53:50PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: Please test.. Results are still coming in but things do look better with your

Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections -- Call for nominations

before voting. Chris Mason, TAB Chair [1] TAB members sit for a term of two years, and half of the board is up for election every year. Five of the seats are up for election now. The other five are halfway through their term and will be up for election next year.

Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections -- Call for nominations

before voting. Chris Mason, TAB Chair [1] TAB members sit for a term of two years, and half of the board is up for election every year. Five of the seats are up for election now. The other five are halfway through their term and will be up for election next year.

Reminder: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections -- Call for nominations

/ADVFtT The deadline for receiving nominations is up until the beginning of the election event. Any statements for the online document need to be sent by Monday Oct 23rd. Please get your nomination in early so everyone has a chance to review the nominations before voting. Chris Mason, TAB Chair [1

[GIT PULL] zstd support (lib, btrfs, squashfs)

Hi Linus, Nick Terrell's patch series to add zstd support to the kernel has been floating around for a while. After talking with Dave Sterba, Herbert and Phillip, we decided to send the whole thing in as one pull request. I have it in my zstd branch:

Re: [GIT PULL] zstd support (lib, btrfs, squashfs)

On 09/08/2017 03:33 PM, Chris Mason wrote: Hi Linus, Nick Terrell's patch series to add zstd support to the kernel has been floating around for a while. After talking with Dave Sterba, Herbert and Phillip, we decided to send the whole thing in as one pull request. I have it in my zstd

Re: [GIT PULL] zstd support (lib, btrfs, squashfs)

On Sat, Sep 09, 2017 at 09:35:59AM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote: On Fri, Sep 08, 2017 at 03:33:05PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote: crypto/Kconfig |9 + crypto/Makefile|1 + crypto/testmgr.c | 10 + crypto/testmgr.h | 71 + crypto/zstd.c

[GIT PULL v2] zstd support (lib, btrfs, squashfs, nocrypto)

Hi Linus, Nick Terrell's patch series to add zstd support to the kernel has been floating around for a while. After talking with Dave Sterba, Herbert and Phillip, we decided to send the whole thing in as one pull request. Herbert had asked about the crypto patch when we discussed the pull, but

Reminder v2: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections -- Call for nominations

://goo.gl/ADVFtT The deadline for receiving nominations is up until the beginning of the election event. Any statements for the online document need to be sent by Monday Oct 23rd. Please get your nomination in early so everyone has a chance to review the nominations before voting. Chris Mason, TAB

Re: [PATCHSET v2] cgroup, writeback, btrfs: make sure btrfs issues metadata IOs from the root cgroup

On 11/30/2017 12:23 PM, David Sterba wrote: On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 01:38:26PM -0500, Chris Mason wrote: On 11/29/2017 12:05 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 09:03:30AM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote: Hello, On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 05:56:08PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: What has happened

Re: [PATCHSET v2] cgroup, writeback, btrfs: make sure btrfs issues metadata IOs from the root cgroup

On 11/29/2017 12:05 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 09:03:30AM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote: Hello, On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 05:56:08PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: What has happened with this patch set? No idea. cc'ing Chris directly. Chris, if the patchset looks good, can you please

Re: [PATCH net-next] modules: allow modprobe load regular elf binaries

On 6 Mar 2018, at 11:12, Linus Torvalds wrote: On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 5:34 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: As the first step in development of bpfilter project [1] the request_module() code is extended to allow user mode helpers to be invoked. Idea is that user mode helpers

Re: [PATCH 2/2] code-of-conduct: Strip the enforcement paragraph pending community discussion

On 6 Oct 2018, at 17:37, James Bottomley wrote: Significant concern has been expressed about the responsibilities outlined in the enforcement clause of the new code of conduct. Since there is concern that this becomes binding on the release of the 4.19 kernel, strip the enforcement clauses

Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections -- Call for nominations

statements must be received by Monday November 12th at 5PM Pacific, so that we have time to setup the slideshow. Current TAB members, and their election year: Chris Mason 2016 H. Peter Anvin 2016 Olof Johansson 2016 Rik van Riel2016 Dan Williams 2016 Jon Corbet 2017 Greg Kroah-Hartman 2017 Steven

Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections -- Call for nominations

for nominations is right before voting begins, any statements must be received by Monday November 12th at 5PM Pacific, so that we have time to setup the slideshow. Current TAB members, and their election year: Chris Mason 2016 H. Peter Anvin 2016 Olof Johansson 2016 Rik van Riel2016 Dan Williams 2016

Re: [PATCH] writepage method changes

On Wednesday, May 09, 2001 10:51:17 PM -0300 Marcelo Tosatti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Wed, 9 May 2001, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > >> Locked for the "not wrote out case" (I will fix my patch now, thanks) > > I just found out that there are filesystems (eg reiserfs) which write out

Re: [reiserfs-dev] Re: reiserfs, xfs, ext2, ext3

On Friday, May 11, 2001 04:00:20 AM -0700 Hans Reiser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alan Cox wrote: > >> > Are you referring to Neil Brown's nfs operations patch as being as >> > ugly as hell, or something else? Just want to understand what you are >> > saying before arguing. >> >> Andi

Re: Reiserfs, Mongo and CPU question

On Tuesday, May 15, 2001 01:41:01 PM +0200 Ricardo Galli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hans and reiserfs developers, > the same student of my university > (http://www.cs.helsinki.fi/linux/linux-kernel/2001-18/0654.html) was > carrying up the mongo benchmarks against reiser, xfs, jfs and

Re: Re[2]: ReiserFS 2.4.4/3.x.0k-pre2

On Tuesday, May 15, 2001 02:24:36 PM +0400 Samium Gromoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > I`m still experiencing file tail corruptions > on subj. > And more: after i had restored bblocked patrition > (by relying on drive`s ability to remap bblks on > write by

Re: Getting FS access events

On Tuesday, May 15, 2001 04:33:57 AM -0400 Alexander Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Tue, 15 May 2001, Linus Torvalds wrote: > >> Looks like there are 19 filesystems that use the buffer cache right now: >> >> grep -l bread fs/*/*.c | cut -d/ -f2 | sort -u | wc >> >> So quite

Re: ReiserFs: Cosmetic problem in linux/Documentation/Changes[2.4.x]

On Friday, May 18, 2001 01:26:01 PM +0200 "Martin.Knoblauch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Martin.Knoblauch" wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I submitted this a short while ago, only to realize later that the >> subject line was not very informative. Sorry. >> >> As a suggestion: maybe the

[PATCH] improve reiserfs 2.4.x O_SYNC and fsync speed

Hi guys, This patch has been lightly tested, I'd appreciate it if some of you could try it out on data you don't care about. The idea is to improve fsync and O_SYNC performance by only doing a commit on the last transaction the file was actually involved in. The old code always forced a

Re: Dying disk and filesystem choice.

On Friday, May 25, 2001 09:21:42 AM -0700 Hans Reiser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > No, our policy is strictly in sync with and reflective of that of the > rest of the linux-kernel. Since the ac series has a different policy, we > can be different in regards to the ac series. Not really, our

Re: Dying disk and filesystem choice.

On Thursday, May 24, 2001 11:16:58 PM +0100 Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> IMHO we are not that deep into code freeze anymore. Freevxfs got added >> in linux-2.4.5-pre*, so I think that a patch that adds a useful feature >> like badblock support would be OK. > > FreeVxFS changes

Re: 2.4.5 Oops at boot

On Wednesday, May 30, 2001 03:03:32 PM -0600 "D. Stimits" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [ snip ] > RAMDISK: Compressed image found at block 0 > Freeing initrd memory: 249k freed > VFS: Mounted root (ext2 filesystem). > Red Hat nash version 3.0.10 starting > VFS: Mounted root (ext2 filesystem)

Re: reiserfs_read_inode2

On Thursday, May 31, 2001 02:27:26 PM +0200 Lukasz Trabinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello > > What it's means? > > portraits:~# dmesg > vs-13042: reiserfs_read_inode2: [2299 593873 0x0 SD] not found > vs-13048: reiserfs_iget: bad_inode. Stat data of (2299 593873) not found > vs-13042:

Re: NULL characters in file on ReiserFS again.

On Thursday, May 31, 2001 03:33:06 PM +0400 Andrej Borsenkow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This happened to me yesterday on kernel-2.4.4-6mdk (Mandrake cooker, based > on 2.4.4-ac14), single reiser root filesystem, mounted with default > options. Hardware - ASUS CUSL2 (i815e chipset), Fujitsu

Re: [RFC] yet another knfsd-reiserfs patch

> On Monday, April 23, 2001 10:45:14 AM -0400 Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> Hi guys, >> >> This patch is not meant to replace Neil Brown's knfsd ops stuff, the >> goal was to whip up something that had a chance of getting into 2.4

Re: [2.4.5 and all ac-Patches] massive file corruption with reiseror NFS

On Saturday, June 02, 2001 02:41:04 PM +0200 Andreas Hartmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Am Samstag, 2. Juni 2001 12:52 schrieb Rasmus Bøg Hansen: >> On Sat, 2 Jun 2001, Andreas Hartmann wrote: >> > I got massive file corruptions with the kernels mentioned in the >> > subject. I can

Re: [NFS] Re: [RFC] yet another knfsd-reiserfs patch

On Saturday, June 02, 2001 12:19:59 AM +0200 Trond Myklebust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Chris, > > Do you really need the parent inode in the filehandle? > > That screws rename up pretty badly, since the filehandle changes when > you rename into a different directory. It means for

Re: [2.4.5 and all ac-Patches] massive file corruption with reiseror NFS

On Saturday, June 02, 2001 08:13:44 PM +0200 Andreas Hartmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Am Samstag, 2. Juni 2001 18:42 schrieben Sie: >> On Saturday, June 02, 2001 02:41:04 PM +0200 Andreas Hartmann >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > Am Samstag, 2. Juni 2001 12:52 schrieb Rasmus Bøg

Re: [OOPS] 245ac7 - ncr53c8xx && reiserfs

On Tuesday, June 05, 2001 03:00:40 PM -0400 Carlos E Gorges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all, > > I get some problems w/ 2.4.5-ac7, ncr53c8xx w/ 2.4.4-ac18 works fine. > > I gave a small looked on problem .. > the problem apparently is w/ ncr53c8xx driver ( who accuses timeout ), > and

Re: [reiserfs-list] major security bug in reiserfs (may affect SuSELinux)

On Wednesday, January 10, 2001 12:38:34 PM -0500 Alexander Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 10 Jan 2001, Chris Mason wrote: > >> In filldir, I don't like the line where we ((char *)dirent += reclen ; >> If reclen is much larger than the buffer sent from users

Re: Possible deadlock with ->writepaged version offlush_dirty_buffers() and 2.4.0

On Wednesday, January 10, 2001 05:56:09 PM -0200 Marcelo Tosatti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Chris, > > It seems there is a possible deadlock condition with your patch which > changes flush_dirty_buffers() to use ->writepage (something which we > _definately_ want for 2.5). Take a

generic_file_write change in 2.4.0-ac8

Hi guys, This code for generic_file_write calls vmtruncate without i_sem held. Is that intentional? It should cause problems for reiserfs at least... -chris diff -u --new-file --recursive --exclude-from /usr/src/exclude linux-2.4.0/mm/filemap.c linux.ac/mm/filemap.c ---

Re: generic_file_write change in 2.4.0-ac8

On Friday, January 12, 2001 04:30:44 PM -0500 Alexander Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Fri, 12 Jan 2001, Chris Mason wrote: > >> >> Hi guys, >> >> This code for generic_file_write calls vmtruncate without i_sem held. Is >

Re: patch:reiserfs 3.6.25 + LVM(Fix oops reiserfs filesystem)

On Saturday, January 13, 2001 11:41:51 PM -0800 hugang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [ patch ] Odd, the create_vi op should never be null, so the real fix is somewhere else. We'll look into this. -chris - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a

Re: More information on reiserfs bug

On Tuesday, January 16, 2001 07:38:58 PM +0100 Jakob Borg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi again, > > It seems the problem occurs every time i start fetchmail... Attached are > ksymoops output and .config (if i remember this time). If there is > anything else I can do to help debug this, just

Re: kernel BUG with 2.4.1-pre7 reiserfs

On Tuesday, January 16, 2001 07:58:37 PM +0100 Jakob Borg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 10:36:43AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> > I seem to remember more possibly useful information scrolling by my >> > screen, but it seems to not have made it to the logs, and I will

Re: set_page_dirty/page_launder deadlock

On Sunday, January 14, 2001 10:56:10 AM -0800 Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Marcelo Tosatti writes: >> > >> > While taking a look at page_launder()... >> >> ... >> >> > set_page_dirty() may lock the pagecache_lock which means potential >> > deadlock since we have the

Re: Kernel 2.4.x and 2.4.1-preX - Higher latency then 2.2.xkernels?

On Saturday, January 20, 2001 02:59:24 PM -0500 Gregory Maxwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Jan 20, 2001 at 02:50:16PM -0500, Shawn Starr wrote: >> It just seems that since using 2.4 ive noticed my poor Pentium 200Mhz >> slow down whether being in X or otherwise. It just seems that

Re: 2.4.1-pre10 slowdown at boot.

On Thursday, January 25, 2001 05:23:26 PM +0100 Ondrej Sury <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 2.4.1-pre10 slows down after printing those (maybe ACPI or reiserfs > issue), and even SysRQ-(s,u,b) is not imediate and waits several (two+) > seconds before (syncing,remounting,booting). > > ACPI:

Re: 2.4.1-pre10 slowdown at boot.

On Thursday, January 25, 2001 06:51:33 PM +0100 Ondrej Sury <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> > reiserfs: checking transaction log (device 03:04) ... >> > Warning, log replay starting on readonly filesystem >>

Re: ACPI error in 2.4.1-pre10 @ via82c686 (Was: 2.4.1-pre10slowdown at boot.)

On Thursday, January 25, 2001 07:37:16 PM +0100 Ondrej Sury <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have discovered that it wasn't reiserfs problem. I have disabled ACPI > in BIOS and everything is ok. So I assume that something has changed in > ACPI between pre9 and pre10 versions and that something

Re: Kernel 2.4.x and 2.4.1-preX - Higher latency then 2.2.xkernels?

On Sunday, January 28, 2001 02:29:09 PM +1100 Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Shawn Starr wrote: >> >> Andrew, the patch HAS made a difference. For example, while untaring >> glibc-2.2.1.tar.gz the system was not sluggish (mouse movements in X) >> etc. >> >> Seems to be a go for

Re: Renaming lost+found

On Friday, January 26, 2001 01:19:49 PM -0500 James Lewis Nance <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > FWIW IBM's JFS file system does not have a lost+found directory. I dont > remember if reiserfs does or not. > reiserfsck creates it. -chris - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line

Re: Reiserfs problem was: Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

On Tuesday, January 30, 2001 03:42:36 PM -0800 "Brett G. Person" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Worked fine here but i am getting segfaults on my Reiser filesystems. > I've been distracted by a project over the last few days. Is what I'm > seeing a symptom of the fs corruption people were

Re: reiserfs min size (was: [2.4.1] mkreiserfs on loopdevice freezes kernel)

On Wednesday, January 31, 2001 11:27:57 PM +0100 Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 31, 2001 at 09:24:39AM +, James Sutherland wrote: >> 32 megaBLOCK?? How big is it in Mbytes? > > Blocksize is 4k, mkreiserfs in my version is telling me it can not generate >

[PATCH] reiserfs transaction overflow

Hi guys, Under certain loads, the reiserfs journal can overflow the max transaction size, leading to a crash (but not corruption). When the transaction is too full for another writer to join, the writer triggers a commit, and waits for the next transaction. But, it doesn't properly check to

[PATCH] ac only, allow reiserfs files > 4GB

This patch should set s_maxbytes correctly for reiserfs in the ac kernels, and adds a reiserfs_setattr call to catch expanding truncates past the MAX_NON_LFS limit for old format files. reiserfs_get_block already catches file writes and such for this case. It also adds a generic_inode_setattr

[PATCH] reiserfs should daemonize

Hi guys, The reiserfs commit thread needs to daemonize. This patch was actually from Andi Kleen eons ago (but blame me if it breaks). Please apply. Against 2.4.3: --- linux/fs/reiserfs/journal.c Thu Apr 19 14:02:56 2001 +++ linux/fs/reiserfs/journal.c Thu Apr 19 18:11:57 2001 @@ -1814,16

[RFC] yet another knfsd-reiserfs patch

Hi guys, This patch is not meant to replace Neil Brown's knfsd ops stuff, the goal was to whip up something that had a chance of getting into 2.4.x, and that might be usable by the AFS guys too. Neil's patch tries to address a bunch of things that I didn't, and looks better for the long run.

Re: [patch] linux likes to kill bad inodes

On Sunday, April 22, 2001 02:10:42 PM +0200 Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi! > > I had a temporary disk failure (played with acpi too much). What > happened was that disk was not able to do anything for five minutes > or so. When disk recovered, linux happily overwrote all inodes

Re: [patch] linux likes to kill bad inodes

On Wednesday, April 25, 2001 10:01:20 PM +0200 Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi! > >> > Hi! >> > >> > I had a temporary disk failure (played with acpi too much). What >> > happened was that disk was not able to do anything for five minutes >> > or so. When disk recovered, linux

[PATCH] reiserfs lfs fix for 2.4.4-pre5 and above

Hello everyone, 2.4.4-pre5 started honoring the s_maxbytes field, so reiserfs needs a patch to allow files > 4GB on 3.6.x format filesystems. If you work with large files on reiserfs and are willing to try the prerelease kernels (non-production), please give this a try, it works for me but

[PATCH] reiserfs highmem bug on tail reads

Ok, so all the reiserfs tail bugs weren't quite fixed yet, the last tail fix can cause problems with highmem turned on. Both bugs are in fs/reiserfs/inode.c:_get_block_create_0 When reading the tail in, if the buffer was already up to date, we skip the disk i/o and return. But the cleanup

Re: [PATCH] SMP race in ext2 - metadata corruption.

On Thursday, April 26, 2001 02:24:26 PM -0400 Alexander Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > >> correct. I bet other fs are affected as well btw. > > If only... block_read() vs. block_write() has the same race. I'm going > through the list of

Re: ReiserFS question

On Thursday, April 26, 2001 11:05:25 PM +0400 Samium Gromoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi People... >got a following "dead of alive" question: >how to find a root block on a ReiserFS partition >with a corrupted superblock? > >reiserfsprogs-3.x.0.9j simply writes -2^32

Re: kernel panic with 2.4.x and reiserfs

On Friday, April 27, 2001 02:40:50 AM -0700 jason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [ ouch ] > > reiserfs_read_super: can't find reiserfs filesystem on dev 03:01 > Invalid session # or type of track > Kernel panic: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on 03:01 > > In case it's any help, I'm running

Re: [patch] linux likes to kill bad inodes

On Friday, April 27, 2001 12:28:54 AM +0200 Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Okay, so what about following patch, followed by attempt to debug it? > [I'd really like to get patch it; killing user's data without good > reason seems evil to me, and this did quite a lot of damage to my >

Re: kernel panic with 2.4.x and reiserfs

On Friday, April 27, 2001 04:33:15 PM +0100 Tony Hoyle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Reiserfs doesn't cope well with crashes Under 2.4 I wouldn't > recommend using it on any kind of critical server - it seems to > progressively corrupt itself (I'm looking at the second reformat and >

Re: reiserfs autofix?

On Sunday, April 29, 2001 02:48:27 PM -0700 putter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > I am kernel newbie, especially with logging filesystems. > Now I am using Mandrake 7.1 with 2.4.3 kernel and imon patch > and NVidia drivers compiled into the kernel. ^^^ The binary only

Re: reiserfs autofix?

On Monday, April 30, 2001 12:07:04 AM -0700 putter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think I have tracked down the problem to the card itself. My machine is > on @ graphics mode all the time, like 24hrs a day, and it seems that it > is somewhat taxing on the cards performance. So now I switch

Re: reiserfs+lndir problem [was: 2.4.4 SMP: spurious EOVERFLOW"Value too large for defined data type"]

On Monday, April 30, 2001 10:55:57 PM +0200 Daniel Elstner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all, > > unfortunately I have to correct me again. > The problem seems unrelated to the kernel version or SMP/UP > (though only 2.4.[34] tried yet). > > Apparently it's a reiserfs/symlink problem. > I

Re: [RFC] yet another knfsd-reiserfs patch

On Monday, April 23, 2001 10:45:14 AM -0400 Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi guys, > > This patch is not meant to replace Neil Brown's knfsd ops stuff, the > goal was to whip up something that had a chance of getting into 2.4.x, > and that might be us

Re: reiserfs+lndir problem [was: 2.4.4 SMP: spurious EOVERFLOW"Value too large for defined data type"]

On Wednesday, May 02, 2001 12:41:52 AM +0200 Daniel Elstner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, 30 Apr 2001 21:03:47 -0400 Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > Apparently it's a reiserfs/symlink problem. >> > I tried doing the

Re: * Re: Severe trashing in 2.4.4

On Tuesday, May 01, 2001 03:11:58 PM -0700 David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Can't say for a definite fact that it was reiserfs but I can say for a > definite fact that something fishy happens sometimes. > > If I have a text file open, something.html comes to mind, If I edit it > and save it

Re: Maximum files per Directory

On Tuesday, May 01, 2001 04:57:02 PM -0600 Andreas Dilger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > H. Peter Anvin writes: >> Not correct, there can't be more than 2^15 *directories* in a single >> directory. I belive this is an ext2 limitation. > > > I see that reiserfs plays some tricks with the

Re: Maximum files per Directory

On Friday, May 04, 2001 01:15:22 PM -0600 Andreas Dilger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Chris writes: >> On Tuesday, May 01, 2001 04:57:02 PM -0600 Andreas Dilger >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > I see that reiserfs plays some tricks with the directory i_nlink count. >> > If you exceed 64536

Re: Maximum files per Directory

On Saturday, May 05, 2001 03:49:20 PM +0200 Jamie Lokier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Chris Mason wrote: >> > Is there a reason that >> > reiserfs chose to have "large number of directories" represented by "1" >> > and not "LINK_MA

<    3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   >