search for: rw_devic

Hiya, I can see it's a regular subject on this list. I, like others wanted to use rsync to synchronise two block devices (as it happens one lvm volume and one nbd device served by qemu-img on a remote host from a qcow2 disk image so that I can keep the old versions) As I couldn't find any report of it being done successfully, I'm just sharing my findings as it might benefit others.

...tic void set_block_group_readonly(struct btrfs_block_group_cache *cache) @@ -2643,27 +2653,27 @@ static void set_block_group_readonly(struct btrfs_block_group_cache *cache) u64 btrfs_reduce_alloc_profile(struct btrfs_root *root, u64 flags) { u64 num_devices = root->fs_info->fs_devices->rw_devices; + u64 num_spares = flags >> 56; u64 tmp; /* First, mask out the RAID levels which aren''t possible */ if (num_devices == 1) flags &= ~(BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID1 | BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID0 | - BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID5); - if (num_devices < 3) - flags &= ~BTRF...

...btrfs_root *root, char *device_path) if (device->is_tgtdev_for_dev_replace) { pr_err("btrfs: unable to remove the dev_replace target dev\n"); - ret = -EINVAL; + ret = -EPERM; goto error_brelse; } if (device->writeable && root->fs_info->fs_devices->rw_devices == 1) { printk(KERN_ERR "btrfs: unable to remove the only writeable " "device\n"); - ret = -EINVAL; + ret = -EPERM; goto error_brelse; } -- 1.8.2.rc1 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a me...

''bh'' is forgot to release if no error is detected Signed-off-by: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@cn.fujitsu.com> --- fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c index 8b9fb8c..69fc902 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c @@ -631,6 +631,7 @@ static int

In a multi device setup, the chunk allocator currently always allocates chunks on the devices in the same order. This leads to a very uneven distribution, especially with RAID1 or RAID10 and an uneven number of devices. This patch always sorts the devices before allocating, and allocates the stripes on the devices with the most available space, as long as there is enough space available. In a low

In a multi device setup, the chunk allocator currently always allocates chunks on the devices in the same order. This leads to a very uneven distribution, especially with RAID1 or RAID10 and an uneven number of devices. This patch always sorts the devices before allocating, and allocates the stripes on the devices with the most available space, as long as there is enough space available. In a low

A bunch of fixes (memory leaks, NULL pointer dereferences and devices hanging in busy state) to sanitize error handling during mount sequence. This is on top of for-linus + slyfox''s double-free fix. Thanks, Ilya Ilya Dryomov (5): Btrfs: fix memory leak in btrfs_parse_early_options() Btrfs: fix subvol_name leak on error in btrfs_mount() Btrfs: avoid null dereference and leaks

...static int should_alloc_chunk(struct btrfs_root *root, return 1; } +static u64 get_system_chunk_thresh(struct btrfs_root *root, u64 type) +{ + u64 num_dev; + + if (type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID10 || + type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID0) + num_dev = root->fs_info->fs_devices->rw_devices; + else if (type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID1) + num_dev = 2; + else + num_dev = 1; /* DUP or single */ + + /* metadata for updating devices and chunk tree */ + return btrfs_calc_trans_metadata_size(root, num_dev + 1); +} + +static void check_system_chunk(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, +...

Hi Linus, My for-linus branch has a one line fix: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus Sage hit a deadlock with ceph on btrfs, and Josef tracked it down to a regression in our initial rc1 pull. When doing nocow writes we were sometimes starting a transaction with locks held. Josef Bacik (1) commits (+1/-0): Btrfs: release path before starting

I''ve been working to try to improve the write-ahead log''s performance, and I found that the bottleneck addresses in the checksum items, especially when we want to make a random write on a large file, e.g a 4G file. Then a idea for this suggested by Chris is to use sub transaction ids and just to log the part of inode that had changed since either the last log commit or the last

Hello, This patch series adds an initial implementation of restriper (it''s a clever name for relocation framework that allows to do selective profile changing and selective balancing with some goodies like pausing/resuming and reporting progress to the user. Profile changing is global (per-FS) so far, per-subvolume profiles require some discussion and can be implemented in future.