similar to: WARNING: at fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:5695 btrfs_alloc_free_block+0x22c/0x370 [btrfs]()

Hi all, Did someone have met this problem before. When doing the tests, I hit the WARN_ON. Is this log make sense or someone had fixed the problem. If needed, I can supply the detail log and the testcase source file. Version: the latest codes at linus git tree. [ 2140.981293] use_block_rsv: 336 callbacks suppressed [ 2140.981295] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [ 2140.981308]

Hi, my btrfs "hangs" when doing a balance operation. I''m using a 3.7.1 kernel from opensuse: linux-opzz 3.7.1-2.10-m4 #11 SMP PREEMPT Fri Jan 11 18:04:04 CET 2013 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux and Btrfs v0.19+ I did a scrub which completed without errors. Then I tried "btrfs filesystem balance /" which work fine for the first 23 of 46 chunks, then ist stopped

Hiya, Recently, a btrfs file system of mine started to behave very poorly with some btrfs kernel tasks taking 100% of CPU time. # btrfs fi show /dev/sdb Label: none uuid: b3ce8b16-970e-4ba8-b9d2-4c7de270d0f1 Total devices 3 FS bytes used 4.25TB devid 2 size 2.73TB used 1.52TB path /dev/sdc devid 1 size 2.70TB used 1.49TB path /dev/sda4 devid 3 size

Dear Devs, I have x4 4TB HDDs formatted with: mkfs.btrfs -L bu-16TB_0 -d raid1 -m raid1 /dev/sd[cdef] /etc/fstab mounts with the options: noatime,noauto,space_cache,inode_cache All on kernel 3.8.13. Upon using rsync to copy some heavily hardlinked backups from ReiserFS, I''ve seen: The following "block rsv returned -28" is repeated 7 times until there is a call trace

This patch adds mixed back ref support for btrfs programs. The mixed back ref is a new disk format. back compatilibity is still not implemented. To try the new disk format, you need fresh formatted btrfs. Signed-off-by: Yan Zheng <zheng.yan@oracle.com> --- diff -urp btrfs-progs-unstable/crc32c.h btrfs-progs-2/crc32c.h --- btrfs-progs-unstable/crc32c.h 2008-09-30 16:50:58.898877720 +0800

Hello, on a fs with 4 disks, raid 10 for data, one drive was failing and has been removed. After reboot and ''mount -o degraded...'', the fs looks full, even though before removal of the failed device it was almost 80% free. root@fs0:~# df -h /mnt/b Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sde 11T 2.5T 41M 100% /mnt/b root@fs0:~# btrfs fi df /mnt/b Data,

Hello, (this is a recap of yesterday''s discussion on BTRFS IRC, also to save relevant pastes before pastebins expire) I have my /home on btrfs; a cronjob makes one snapshot every 30 minutes; these snapshots are kept for 24-48 hours, then deleted in batches. This is a 16K Leaf/Node BTRFS on top of mdadm RAID1. As system uptime approached 2 weeks, I started noticing that the free space

We use set_bit() to assign ordered extent''s flags, but in the related tracepoint we don''t do the same thing, which makes the trace output not to parse flags correctly. Also, since the flags are bits stuff, we change to use __print_flags with a ''delim'' instead of __print_symbolic. Signed-off-by: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com> ---

Now we set @refs to 2 on creating a new extent buffer, meanwhile we allocate the needed free space, but we don''t give enough free_extent_buffer() to reduce the eb''s references to zero so that the eb can finally be freed, so the problem is we has decrease the referene count of backrefs to zero, which ends up releasing the space occupied by the eb, and this space can be allocated

This patch makes us cache the extent state we find in find_delalloc_range since we''ll have to lock the extent later on in the function. This will keep us from re-searching for the rang when we try to lock the extent. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@redhat.com> --- fs/btrfs/extent_io.c | 11 ++++++++--- 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git

I noticed a few days ago that btrfs fi defrag -cXXX can not be used to compress files unless they are fragmented. The attached patch passes the compression flag to should_defrag_range, where it disables the adjacent-extent and extent size checks if set. The inline/sparse extent check is not modified - I assumed it would not be useful to compress inline extents. -- Andrew Mahone andrew DOT mahone

The memory allocation failure is BUG_ON in add_excluded_extent (following the code path). No need to BUG_ON -ENOMEM inside btrfs_alloc_logged_file_extent. Signed-off-by: Wang Sheng-Hui <shhuiw@gmail.com> --- fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 6 ++---- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c index 95492cc..9b9a6fa 100644 ---

Hi I am hitting this Warning reproducible, the workload is a ceph osd, kernel ist 3.1.0-rc5. Best Regards, martin [ 5472.099766] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [ 5472.099833] WARNING: at fs/btrfs/inode.c:2193 btrfs_orphan_commit_root+0xb0/0xc0 [btrfs]() [ 5472.099838] Hardware name: MS-96B3 [ 5472.099842] Modules linked in: radeon ttm drm_kms_helper drm i2c_algo_bit psmouse sp5100_tco

Hello, a backtrace from a machine running a Btrfs RAID0 array with two disks is attached. I''ve never seen this bug before. Please let me know if you need any further info/experiments. Andrej

Dave Sterba pointed out a sleeping while atomic bug while doing fsync. This is because I''m an idiot and didn''t realize that rwlock''s were spin locks, so we''ve been holding this thing while doing allocations and such which is not good. This patch fixes this by dropping the write lock before we do anything heavy and re-acquire it when it is done. We also need

Hi, I''m getting a Kernel Bug when trying to delete some file in a btrfs while using 3.2.0-rc5. Here''s the kernel log: [ 676.672080] btrfs bad tree block start 0 40044687360 [ 676.672233] btrfs bad tree block start 0 40044687360 [ 676.672323] btrfs bad tree block start 0 40044687360 [ 676.672399] btrfs bad tree block start 0 40044687360 [ 676.672488] btrfs bad tree block

We currently have this problem where you can truncate pages that have not yet been written for an ordered extent. We do this because the truncate will be coming behind to clean us up anyway so what''s the harm right? Well if truncate fails for whatever reason we leave an orphan item around for the file to be cleaned up later. But if the user goes and truncates up the file and tries to

On btrfs, do the following ------------------ # su user1 # cd btrfs-part/ # touch aaa # getfacl aaa # file: aaa # owner: user1 # group: user1 user::rw- group::rw- other::r-- # su user2 # cd btrfs-part/ # setfacl -m u::rwx aaa # getfacl aaa # file: aaa # owner: user1 # group: user1 user::rwx <- successed to setfacl group::rw- other::r-- ------------------ but we

I already posted this in the thread "ENOSPC with mkdir and rename", but now I have a device with 100GB unallocated on the "btrfs fi sh" output, and when I run a rebalance of the form: > btrfs filesystem balance start -dusage=50 -musage=10 "$mount" I get more than 75 of such stack traces contaminating the klog. I've put some of them up in a gist here:

- RAID10 btrfs volume consisting of 4 disks. - One disk failed, was replaced, resync started (`btrfs dev add /dev/sdf /srv; btrfs dev del missing /srv`) - Another disk failed before resync was done. Disk was replaced, resync restarted. (`btrfs dev add /dev/sdc /srv; btrfs dev del missing /srv`) Naturally I don''t expect it to recover from 2 failures, but doing the attempt was