similar to: Change to unstable mkfs-btrfs API

This requires changing the generator so it can handle passing optional arguments all thr way through to the daemon, changing the protocol (see previous patch set), and implementing the new mkfs-opts call. At the moment there is just an optional blocksize argument, thus mimicking what you can already do with 'mkfs-b'. But this change will allow us in future to encode much of the rest of

Hi, I reported a bug to anaconda (rhbz 901905), but it might be btfs related. Anaconda does this: 18:49:10,317 INFO program: Running... mkfs.btrfs --data=single --label=fedora /dev/vdb1 /dev/vdc1 /dev/vdd1 /dev/vde1 18:49:10,742 INFO program: 18:49:10,746 INFO program: WARNING! - Btrfs Btrfs v0.19 IS EXPERIMENTAL 18:49:10,746 INFO program: WARNING! - see http://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org before

Hi, I try to format a USB memory with a Btrfs. I can format it with mkfs.btrfs without problems. But; when I try to mount it, it fails to mount with the below error messages. But the USB memory works fine with other filesystems (ext4, XFS etc.). So, the hardware is not faulty. tarkane@tarkane:~$ sudo mkfs.btrfs -d single -n 4096 /dev/sdb1 WARNING! - Btrfs v0.18-26-g0030f1d IS EXPERIMENTAL

Hi all, are there any plans that future versions of mkfs.btrfs will do an initial pre-discard for SSDs? (AFAIK mkfs.btrfs does not do this currently) For Ext4, mke2fs does this with the -E discard option. From the mke2fs manpage: -E discard Attempt to discard blocks at mkfs time (discarding blocks initially is useful on solid state devices and sparse / thin-provisioned storage). When

Add man/mkfs.btrfs.8.in Kept the name with the name in, so that further processing such as BUILD_DATE BUILD_VERSION etc. could be included later. All man pages included in the man directory to avoid file cluttering. Signed-off-by: Goldwyn Rodrigues <rgoldwyn@suse.de> --- man/mkfs.btrfs.8.in | 63 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 0

Currently mkfs in response to mkfs.btrfs -d raid10 dev1 dev2 instead of telling "you can''t do that" creates a SINGLE on two devices, and only rebalance can transform it to raid0. Generally, it never warns users about decisions it makes and it''s not at all obvious which profile it picks when. Fix this by checking the number of effective devices and reporting back

When building from tmp branch I got this error: mkfs.c: In function ‘main’: mkfs.c:730:6: error: ‘ret’ may be used uninitialized in this function mkfs.c:841:43: error: ‘parent_dir_entry’ may be used uninitialized in this function make: *** [mkfs.o] Error 1 "git blame" shows the last commit for both lines was commit e3736c698e8b490bea1375576b718a2de6e89603 Author: Donggeun Kim

I''m hitting an error with the default mkfs.btrfs in debian wheezy: ford:~# uname -a Linux ford.blinkenlights.nl 3.1.0-1-kirkwood #1 Tue Nov 15 00:17:24 UTC 2011 armv5tel GNU/Linux ford:~/btrfs-progs# dpkg -l | grep btrfs ii btrfs-tools 0.19+20111105-1 Checksumming Copy on Write Filesystem utilities ford:~# mkfs.btrfs /dev/vgroot/home WARNING! - Btrfs Btrfs

Signed-off-by: Matias Bjørling <m@bjorling.me> --- man/mkfs.btrfs.8.in | 11 ++++++----- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/man/mkfs.btrfs.8.in b/man/mkfs.btrfs.8.in index 41163e0..db8c57c 100644 --- a/man/mkfs.btrfs.8.in +++ b/man/mkfs.btrfs.8.in @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ mkfs.btrfs uses all the available storage for the filesystem. .TP \fB\-d\fR, \fB\-\-data

Extend mkfs options to specify optional or potentially backwards incompatible features. Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz> --- man/mkfs.btrfs.8.in | 9 ++++ mkfs.c | 124 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- 2 files changed, 123 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/man/mkfs.btrfs.8.in b/man/mkfs.btrfs.8.in index a3f1503..548e754 100644 ---

$./mkfs.btrfs -f /dev/sdd -b 2M [...] mkfs.btrfs: volumes.c:845: btrfs_alloc_chunk: Assertion `!(ret)'' failed. Aborted (core dumped). We should return error to userspace instead of the above. Signed-off-by: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com> --- mkfs.c | 23 +++++++++++++++-------- volumes.c | 16 +++++++++++----- 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) diff --git

[Adding linux-ext4 mailing list. The original bug report is here: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2015-November/msg00078.html ] On Sat, Nov 07, 2015 at 01:22:45PM -0600, Jason Pepas wrote: > On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 5:03 AM, Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com> wrote: > > How about 'strace mkfs.ext2 ..' and see if any system calls are > > returning errors.

Hi all : there is a problem on libguestfs-1.29.40 after command :make check libguestfs: error: mkfs_btrfs: /dev/vda1: device /dev/vda1 is too small (must be at least 256 MB) FAIL: test_btrfs_image_0 3/515 test_btrfstune_enable_skinny_metadata_extent_refs_0 libguestfs: error: btrfstune_enable_skinny_metadata_extent_refs: /dev/vda1: btrfstune: invalid option -- 'x' usage: btrfstune

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=807905 Currently if you specify the blocksize parameter to mkfs-opts with a btrfs filesystem, then it fails, because mkfs.btrfs interprets the -b option as meaning filesystem size. The first patch fixes this by disallowing blocksize (it cannot be mapped meaningfully into btrfs parameters). The second patch adds the full /sbin/mkfs.btrfs utility to the

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=984236 kernel-3.10.0-1.fc20.x86_64 Should it be possible to mkfs.btrfs on a virtual LV backed by LVM thinp? I can successfully create an XFS fs on the same virtual device. The virtual LV is 16TB in size, I haven''t tried anything smaller yet to see if that''s the problem. There is a dmesg attached to the bug report. Just because it

gcc 4.6 complains about several possible use-before-initialise cases in mkfs, and stops. Fix these by initialising one of the variables in question, and using the correct error-handling paths for the remainder. Signed-off-by: Hugo Mills <hugo@carfax.org.uk> --- mkfs.c | 7 ++++--- 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/mkfs.c b/mkfs.c index 3a87d6e..edd7018

I was playing around with btrfs, and did a mkfs.btrfs on one of my partition. Mistakes, it was my data partition (ext3 based). I have not yet mounted the device, but the mkfs.btrfs continued to completion. Is it possible to salvage my ext3 filesystem? Anyway to reverse the effect of mkfs.btrfs? Thank you for your help/answer. -- Regards, Peter Teoh

A way of disabling features that are on by default in case it''s not wanted, eg. due to lack of support in the used kernel. Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz> --- mkfs.c | 6 +++++- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/mkfs.c b/mkfs.c index cd0af9ef8b4f..f825e1b6bc2d 100644 --- a/mkfs.c +++ b/mkfs.c @@ -1168,7 +1168,11 @@ static int

I accidentally did a mkfs.btrfs on a used btrfs filesystem, which now shows as empty. Is there any way to get the data back? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html