search for: ordered_data_close

...~(root->sectorsize - 1), + (u64)-1); /* * We''re truncating a file that used to have good data down to * zero. Make sure it gets into the ordered flush list so that @@ -3469,8 +3477,8 @@ static int btrfs_setsize(struct inode *inode, loff_t newsize) BTRFS_I(inode)->ordered_data_close = 1; /* we don''t support swapfiles, so vmtruncate shouldn''t fail */ - truncate_setsize(inode, newsize); - ret = btrfs_truncate(inode); + truncate_pagecache(inode, oldsize, newsize); + ret = btrfs_truncate(inode, newsize); } return ret; @@ -6522,87 +6530,43 @@ out:...

Hello, I''m seeing a lot of warnings in dmesg with a BTRFS filesystem. I''m using the 3.1 kernel, I found a patch for these warnings ( http://marc.info/?l=linux-btrfs&m=131547325515336&w=2) <http://marc.info/?l=linux-btrfs&m=131547325515336&w=2>, but that patch has already been included in 3.1. Are there any other patches I can try? I''m using

After running ceph on XFS for some time, I decided to try btrfs again. Performance with the current "for-linux-min" branch and big metadata is much better. The only problem (?) I''m still seeing is a warning that seems to occur from time to time: [87703.784552] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [87703.789759] WARNING: at fs/btrfs/inode.c:2103

...>i_size & (~mask), (u64)-1); - trans = btrfs_start_transaction(root, 1); + /* + * 1 item for orphan item + * 1 item for the inode item + */ + trans = btrfs_start_transaction(root, 2); + if (IS_ERR(trans)) { + WARN_ON(1); + return; + } /* * setattr is responsible for setting the ordered_data_close flag, @@ -4580,7 +4649,7 @@ static void btrfs_truncate(struct inode *inode) ret = btrfs_orphan_add(trans, inode); if (ret) goto out; - /* FIXME, add redo link to tree so we don''t leak on crash */ + ret = btrfs_truncate_inode_items(trans, root, inode, inode->i_size, B...