similar to: 'ioctl:: Inappropriate ioctl for device' when trying to shrink partition

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 2000 matches similar to: "'ioctl:: Inappropriate ioctl for device' when trying to shrink partition"

2011 Feb 08
10
mkfs.btrfs - error checking /dev/sda5 mount status
Hi, I''m hitting this issue - sda5 is a normal device, nothing to do with loop, encryption etc. # mkfs.btrfs /dev/sda5 WARNING! - Btrfs v0.19-35-g1b444cd-dirty IS EXPERIMENTAL WARNING! - see http://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org before using error checking /dev/sda5 mount status Is there something I can do to resolve this? Thank you Lubos -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
2011 May 30
5
Damaged super block / fs root
I have accidently damaged the first block(s) of a btrfs partition and can''t mount it anymore. I can see that my data is still intact by running a command like: cat /dev/sda5 | hexdump -C | more Do any (experimental) tools exist which would allow me to recover the files? Thank you -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a
2009 Nov 05
7
Unexpected ENOSPC on a SSD-drive after day of uptime, kernel 2.6.32-rc5
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
2011 Nov 01
1
btrfs-progs
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
2009 Dec 21
0
[PATCH] btrfsctl: scan device and exit without using ioctl
''btrfsctl -A /path/to/device/file'' would only scan for a valid btrfs on the device using volume recognition helpers. --- btrfsctl.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ 1 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/btrfsctl.c b/btrfsctl.c index 66c4e89..61020de 100644 --- a/btrfsctl.c +++ b/btrfsctl.c @@ -34,6 +34,8 @@ #include
2009 Aug 26
0
btrfsctl -a doesn't find my btrfs
If I scan I device with a btrfs with -A, it finds it: (~/btrfs-progs-unstable) sudo ./btrfsctl -A /dev/sda5 operation complete Btrfs v0.19-1-g4f89b6e-dirty But when I do a "scan all devices", it can''t find my btrfs on /dev/sda5: (~/btrfs-progs-unstable) sudo ./btrfsctl -a Scanning for Btrfs filesystems failed to read /dev/sr0 I''m using btrfs-progs-unstable version
2008 Jul 18
4
btrfsctl -A not returning useful information
[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
2011 Oct 16
2
unresolved ref root error
Hello, On a newly created filesystem with btrfs-progs-git-20111009 and the 3.1.0-rc8 kernel I am getting the following error when doing btrfsck after main OS installation fs tree 256 refs 2 unresolved ref root 256 dir 256 index 2 namelen 8 name __active error 600 found 4215058432 bytes used err is 1 total csum bytes: 3962760 total tree bytes: 157192192 total fs tree bytes: 146976768
2009 Nov 27
5
unexpected raid1 behavior?
Hi, I''m starting to play with btrfs on my new computer. I''m running Gentoo and have compiled the 2.6.31 kernel, enabling btrfs. Now I have 2 partitions (on 2 different sata disks) that are free for me to play with, each about 375 gb in size. I wanted to create a "raid1" volume using these two partitions, so I did: # mkfs.btrfs -d raid1 /dev/sda5 /dev/sdb5 # mount
2011 Oct 14
2
snapshot issues
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 |
2010 Jan 09
2
Still Problems with /dev/btrfs-control
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
2009 Nov 03
2
[PATCH]] Btrfs: fix destroy snapshot to get the right parent dentry
In snapshot destroy the dentry used for parent was the snapshot dentry itself. Remove d_invalidate since always return EBUSY, making possible to remove a snapshot using the btrfsctl -D option. Signed-off-by: Rui Miguel Silva <rmfrfs@gmail.com> --- fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 7 ++----- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c index
2011 Feb 17
7
Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 29302] New: Null pointer dereference with large max_sectors_kb
(switched to email. Please respond via emailed reply-to-all, not via the bugzilla web interface). On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 13:20:20 GMT bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote: > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=29302 > > Summary: Null pointer dereference with large max_sectors_kb > Product: IO/Storage > Version: 2.5 > Kernel
2009 Jan 19
4
[Patch] Btrfs: use BTRFS_VOL_NAME_MAX for struct btrfs_ioctl_vol_args
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
2009 Feb 06
2
How do I correctly mount a multidevice volume via fstab?
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
2007 Dec 21
0
online resizing (including shrinking) pushed out
Hello everyone, Just before I head off to xmas vacation, I've pushed out my current queue of unstable things to the unstable tree. The big changes are the online resize, and a very very simple form of ENOSPC detection: btrfsctl -r new_size /mount_point new_size can be an absolute number: btrfsctl -r 8g /mount_point or it can be an relative number: # add 4GB btrfsctl -r +4g /mount_point
2009 Jan 13
0
[btrfs-progs 2/4] Add man/btrfsctl.8.in
Add man/btrfsctl.8.in Signed-off-by: Goldwyn Rodrigues <rgoldwyn@gmail.com> --- man/btrfsctl.8.in | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) create mode 100644 man/btrfsctl.8.in diff --git a/man/btrfsctl.8.in b/man/btrfsctl.8.in new file mode 100644 index 0000000..e11f46a --- /dev/null +++ b/man/btrfsctl.8.in @@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
2008 Apr 03
1
How to remove a snapshot?
Hi, I have got big question: How to remove snapshot from Btrfs? I don't found option for this in btrfsctl. -- Best regards Steven Jurczyk
2010 Apr 11
1
Can't mount removable device if device name changes.
I''ve got a btrfs on an sd card, which I''m using as the root fs on a beagle. That''s not the problem :) The machine I generate my images on has an internal sd reader, and I also have a usb card reader. After creating the fs on the internal reader, I ended up plugging it in on the external reader. internal: sdd external: sdh mount /dev/sdh2 /mnt -t btrfs > mount:
2007 Aug 07
1
Subdirectory snapshots
Hi Chris and everyone else, First let me congratulate you for the nice job on btrfs. I've been stress testing it with parallel kernel compiles intermixed with snapshot taking, up to about ~100 load avg on a dual core box and it's doing quite well :-) I noticed that when creating snapshots it seems to always snapshot an entire subvolume, that is if one does: test1:/mnt# btrfsctl -s