search for: lxoliva

...do more than umount or msync to ensure changes make it to subsequent snapshots that are supposed to be consistent? Any tips on where to start looking so as to fix the problem, or even to confirm that the problem is indeed in btrfs? TIA, -- Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter http://FSFLA.org/~lxoliva/ You must be the change you wish to see in the world. -- Gandhi Be Free! -- http://FSFLA.org/ FSF Latin America board member Free Software Evangelist Red Hat Brazil Compiler Engineer -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message t...

...names on each reboot!), and it refused, because the swap partition was busy. Couldn''t btrfs use the same mechanisms to protect its own mounted partitions from accidents? Thanks in advance for any advice, fixes, or improvements, -- Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter http://FSFLA.org/~lxoliva/ You must be the change you wish to see in the world. -- Gandhi Be Free! -- http://FSFLA.org/ FSF Latin America board member Free Software Evangelist Red Hat Brazil Compiler Engineer -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message...

...ing one) that shows that these relaxations actually make real-world programs faster. Do you know of any? It is funny that even the creator of TLSDESC found that their optimization didn't actually makes NPTL faster as it is mentioned in the "Conclusion" section in http://www.fsfla.org/~lxoliva/ writeups/TLS/RFC-TLSDESC-x86.txt. So I don't think I'm proposing we simplify code by degrading user's code. It feels more like we are making too much effort on something that doesn't produce any measurable difference in real life. > So I don't see a strong reason to do a c...

...relaxations actually make real-world programs faster. Do you know of > > any? It is funny that even the creator of TLSDESC found that their > > optimization didn't actually makes NPTL faster as it is mentioned in the > > "Conclusion" section in http://www.fsfla.org/~lxoliva/ > > writeups/TLS/RFC-TLSDESC-x86.txt. > > > > So I don't think I'm proposing we simplify code by degrading user's code. > > It feels more like we are making too much effort on something that > doesn't > > produce any measurable difference in real li...

...fd; if (flags == O_RDWR) device->writeable = 1; + fprintf(stderr, "Device %llu (%s) opened in fd %i\n", + (unsigned long long)device->devid, + device->name, device->fd); } return 0; fail: -- 1.7.4.4 -- Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter http://FSFLA.org/~lxoliva/ You must be the change you wish to see in the world. -- Gandhi Be Free! -- http://FSFLA.org/ FSF Latin America board member Free Software Evangelist Red Hat Brazil Compiler Engineer -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message...

On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 6:59 PM, Rafael Avila de Espindola < rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > Rui Ueyama via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes: > > > tl;dr: TLSDESC have solved most problems in formerly inefficient TLS > access > > models, so I think we can drop TLS relaxation support from lld. > > > > lld's code to handle

Hello, I''m using kernel 3.1.0 and I have both / and /home as btrfs. I used suspend to ram quite often and never had a problem, but yesterday I''ve suspended to get into a plane and when I resumed my /home was all about input/output errors. Reboot did not help either. My root (/) did not suffer any problems. Today I''ve upgraded btrfs-progs to latest GIT and tried scrub

...e it does not only reduce the complexity and amount of the existing code, but also reduces the amount of knowledge you need to have to read the code, without sacrificing performance of lld-generated files in practice. Thoughts? [1] https://www.akkadia.org/drepper/tls.pdf [2] http://www.fsfla.org/~lxoliva/writeups/TLS/RFC-TLSDESC-x86.txt -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20171107/b39b7aaf/attachment-0001.html>