similar to: [PATCH]] Btrfs: fix destroy snapshot to get the right parent dentry

Add a mount option user_subvol_rm_allowed that allows users to delete a (potentially non-empty!) subvol when they would otherwise we allowed to do an rmdir(2). We duplicate the may_delete() checks from the core VFS code to implement identical security checks (minus the directory size check). Signed-off-by: Sage Weil <sage@newdream.net> --- fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 1 + fs/btrfs/ioctl.c |

Alex pointed out the consequences after a transaction is not committed when a subvolume is deleted, so in case of a crash before an actual commit happens will let the subvolume reappear. Original post: http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-btrfs/msg22088.html Josef''s objections: http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-btrfs/msg22256.html While there''s no need to do a full commit for

Hi everyone, This patchset is the latest approach I''m using for the Ceph storage daemon to keep track of which data has safely committed to disk. The basic idea is to not use the (problematic) user transaction ioctls at all. Instead, the daemon quiesces its own write requests, initiates an async snapshot, and then continues. The snapshot approach is nice because it provides rollback.

From: Ajesh JS <ajesh.js@hp.com> This patch provides a mechanism to modify the permission of a subvolume in a btrfs file system This helps to apply a policy of having read-write subvolume inside a read-only subvolume. One use case is to have the whole root file system as a read-only subvolume and have /etc as a read-write subvolume inside. Signed-off-by: Ajesh JS <ajesh.js@hp.com>

When btrfs_start_transaction() fails, we should call btrfs_std_error() properly for filesystem to readonly. (in this patch, forced readonly framework is used) Signed-off-by: Tsutomu Itoh <t-itoh@jp.fujitsu.com> --- fs/btrfs/file.c | 1 + fs/btrfs/inode.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++------- fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 11 ++++++++++- fs/btrfs/relocation.c | 4 +++-

[root@btrfs progs-unstable]# btrfsctl -A /dev/sdb ioctl returns 0 [root@btrfs progs-unstable]# btrfsctl -A /dev/sdc ioctl returns 0 /dev/sdb has a btrfs, while /dev/sdc is blank. What''s that output supposed to mean ? Is it a bug ? -- 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

Hello, I''ve just pulled btrfs-progs from the new git repo git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-progs.git However, when I come to make it fails like so: gcc -Wp,-MMD,./.btrfsctl.o.d,-MT,btrfsctl.o -Wall -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -g -Werror -Os -c btrfsctl.c gcc -g -Werror -Os -o btrfsctl btrfsctl.o ctree.o disk-io.o radix-tree.o extent-tree.o

E.g. btrfsctl -r -4000m /dev/sda5 results in: ioctl:: Inappropriate ioctl for device Distribution: Ubuntu 10.10 Kernel: 2.6.35-22-generic According to the Synaptic Package manager, the version of btrfs-tools is 0.19+20100601-3 Other information that can be of interest: - I started Ubuntu on a live CD - before invoking the btrfsctl command I invoked apt-get update. I have googled but have not

Good afternoon btrfs, I have been having issues with snapshots not reading the whole file tree below them. I have installed new btrfs-progs from git://git.darksatanic.net/repo/btrfs-progs-unstable.git made and installed them. My tree is: /Btrfs | |__ nfs1 | |__ data |

I found userspace tool, btrfsctl, uses BTRFS_VOL_NAME_MAX, and it also looks that this one is more proper. Kill BTRFS_PATH_NAME_MAX since no one will use it. Signed-off-by: WANG Cong <wangcong@zeuux.org> Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com> --- diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c index c2aa33e..f229950 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c @@ -472,7

Hi Chris, This is the extent of my current queue of Btrfs snapshot/subvol/commit stuff. Most of these were posted several months ago. Can be sent upstream during this merge window? Not having this functionality is becoming a bit of a roadblock for our efforts to keep the Ceph data in a consistent state. These patches are also available from

Thanks for the quick reply! But I still have problems with btrfsctl: > stat /dev/btrfs-control File: `/dev/btrfs-control'' Size: 0 Blocks: 0 IO Block: 4096 block special file Device: ch/12d Inode: 659848 Links: 1 Device type: a,3e Access: (0644/brw-r--r--) Uid: ( 0/ root) Gid: ( 0/ root) Access: 2010-01-09 11:31:15.757979602 +0100

I''ve just finished installing onto an OCZ Agilent v2 SSD with btrfs as filesystem. However to my surprise I''ve hit an ENOSPC condition one one of the partitions within less than a day of uptime, while the filesystem on that partition only reported 50% to be in use, which is far from the 75% limit people mention on the ML. Note that this occurs using a vanilla 2.6.32-rc5 kernel

Hello everybody, I've my Gentoo's /usr/portage on a loopback btrfs. Just wanted to sync and got an oops. I've a rsync and a ls process in status D now. The system has been in suspend (tuxonice 3.0-rc3) with mounted btrfs, perhaps that is related? Dec 7 19:18:38 revo BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 0000000c Dec 7 19:18:38 revo printing

Hi all, I am using a single volume across two devices sdb7 and sda1, initially created on sdb7, and added sda1 using btrfs-vol later. The fstab entry: /dev/disk/by-id/scsi-SATA_ST31000333AS_9TE12DSC-part7 /mnt/btrfs btrfs defaults 1 2 Now after boot I get: ---- device fsid c4822885057410c-d2d65a83c2f15fb4 devid 1 transid 73034 /dev/sdb7 btrfs: failed to read chunk tree on sdb7 ---- So I have

Hi, Let me know if this is the wrong place to ask... I''m using Fedora 12 x86_64, mostly with the newer 21.6.32 kernel, and have a single btrfs filesystem within a 120Gb partition. I''d like to extend the space btrfs can use. One option is presumably add a new device to btrfs, but I was hoping to simple resize the existing partition to say 160Gb. With ext4 I might do

Right now inode cache inode is treated as the same as space cache inode, ie. keep inode in memory till putting super. But this leads to an awkward situation. If we''re going to delete a snapshot/subvolume, btrfs will not actually delete it and return free space, but will add it to dead roots list until the last inode on this snap/subvol being destroyed. Then we''ll fetch deleted

The kernel side for rescan, which is needed if you want to enable qgroup tracking on a non-empty volume. The first patch splits btrfs_qgroup_account_ref into readable ans reusable units. The second patch adds the rescan implementation (refer to its commit message for a description of the algorithm). The third patch starts an automatic rescan when qgroups are enabled. It is only separated to

Hi! I recently tried to mount a filesystem in RAID1 mode using loopback devices. I followed the instructions at [1]. Here''s exactly what I''ve done: $ dd if=/dev/zero of=raid1_0.img bs=1M count=500 $ dd if=/dev/zero of=raid1_1.img bs=1M count=500 $ mkfs.btrfs -m raid1 -d raid1 raid1_0.img raid1_1.img $ losetup /dev/loop0 raid1_0.img $ losetup /dev/loop1 raid1_1.img $ mount -t

From: Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com> (This patch is for the review/test not yet for the integration). Here is an implementation of the feature to add label to the subvolume and snapshots. Which would help sysadmin to better manager the subvol and snapshots. This can be done in two ways, one - using attr which is user land only changes but drawback is able to change the label