similar to: [PATCH][BTRFS-PROGS][V3] btrfs filesystem df

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi all, this is a new attempt to improve the output of the command "btrfs fi df". The previous attempt received a good reception. However there was no a general consensus about the wording. Moreover I still didn''t understand how btrfs was using the disks. A my first attempt was to develop a new command which shows how the disks

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.

Hi, While dogfooding our lldb based IDE on Linux, I am seeing a lot of variable evaluation errors related to DW_TAG_member which prevents us from release the IDE. Can anyone help to confirm if they are known issues? If not, any information you need to troubleshoot this issue? Here is one example: (lldb) fr v *error: biggrep_master_server_async 0x10b9a91a: DW_TAG_member '_M_pod_data'

If you're going to use clang built binaries with lldb, you'll want to pass -fstandalone-debug - this is the default on platforms where lldb is the primary debugger (Darwin and freebsd) Not sure if that is the problem you are seeing, but will be a problem sooner or later On Mar 26, 2016 4:16 PM, "Jeffrey Tan via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi, >

We have a bad bug in udev if compiled with klibc. I seems that the needle string can't have a strlen of 1. This test case illustrates it: #include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> int main(int argc, char *argv[], char *envp[]) { char *hay = "a/b"; char *needle = "/"; if (memmem(hay, strlen(hay), needle, strlen(needle)) == NULL) printf("This uses the

Thanks David. I meant to send to lldb maillist, but glad to hear response here. Our binary is built from gcc: String dump of section '.comment': [ 1] GCC: (GNU) 4.9.x-google 20150123 (prerelease) Is there any similar flags we should use? By doing "strings -a [binary] | grep -i gcc", I found the following flags being used: GNU C++ 4.9.x-google 20150123 (prerelease)

Hi, We would like to add a version number to the bitcode wrapper. This feature would allow easier identification of what compiler produced the bitcode so that known incompatibilities with LTO compilation could be detected. Roughly speaking, this version number would consist of the major, minor and optionally the patch version of the compiler used to produce the bitcode. The version information

Sorry if I was unclear. There are currently no “known incompatibilities” that I am aware of, although I fully admit to not being an expert on the topic. The idea is that we add versioning information to the bitcode so that if an issue were discovered, it could be easily detected and dealt with. Douglas Yung From: Bob Wilson [mailto:bob.wilson at apple.com] Sent: Friday, September 26, 2014 16:39

This implements most of what I wrote here: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2019-July/msg00213.html

v1 was here: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2019-July/thread.html#00231 The changes address everything that Eric picked up in his review of the first two patches. I have also added two more patches (4 and 5) which respectively fix docs and change int status -> unsigned status, as discussed. Passes make, check, check-valgrind. Rich.

As I understand it, the bitcode compatibility promise doesn't extend as far as debug info metadata (happy to be wrong here!). I think we have a usecase where need to guarantee that debug information from any two arbitrary bitcode files going into an LTO link will result in the expected/correct debug information going into the resulting ELF file; unless we can be sure that this will always

Building on Solaris 8 with Sun's compiler, I get the following error. Would you fix this? Using gcc is not really a good option for me. /opt/forte8/SUNWspro/bin/cc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../.. -I/opt/csw/inclu\de -fast -xarch=v8 -I/opt/csw/include -c buffer.c "buffer.c", line 159: void function cannot return value "buffer.c", line 205: void function cannot return

I want to use the plot(model) function to generate Tukey-anscomb and Q-Q plots of a lm(). I manage to change all labels but the main one which apparently is neither main or sub. So far I have tried as par setting: cex (changes symbol size within the plot), cex.main (no effect), cex.sub (no effect) cex.lab (changes label size), cex.axis (changes axis label size). What I would like to change is the

On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 11:35 PM, Alex Rosenberg <alexr at leftfield.org> wrote: > How is this use case different from the LTO-supported toolchains shipped > by other vendors such as Apple? Do they have this theoretical problem too? > > If the issue is solely constrained to debug info metadata, then why not > use metadata to describe the format/version of the debug info? >

On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 8:10 PM, Yung, Douglas < douglas_yung at playstation.sony.com> wrote: > Hi – > > > > I realize the thread has drifted a little, but I wanted to get back to my > original proposal. I would like to make a change to the bitcode file > wrapper to include the version of llvm that produced the bitcode. I would > like to write this version into the

Sorry i don`t copy everything: TEST-MAIL1# echo "ls //orphan_dir:0000"|debugfs.ocfs2 /dev/dm-0|wc debugfs.ocfs2 1.6.4 5239722 26198604 246266859 TEST-MAIL1# echo "ls //orphan_dir:0001"|debugfs.ocfs2 /dev/dm-0|wc debugfs.ocfs2 1.6.4 6074335 30371669 285493670 TEST-MAIL2 ~ # echo "ls //orphan_dir:0000"|debugfs.ocfs2 /dev/dm-0|wc debugfs.ocfs2 1.6.4 5239722 26198604

I've configured a text Xen system using ocfs2 1.4.1 as the shared filesystem to enable migration. So far the file based xen disk sharing is working well. Yesterday I tried to do a "xm save vm /ocfs2/vm.save" and I keep getting the following message: __ocfs2_file_aio_write:2185 ERROR: status = -14 The file created is only 9113 bytes long where it should be about 2 GB i.e.

I''ve had a go at determining exactly what happens when you create a filesystem without enough devices to meet the requested replication strategy: # mkfs.btrfs -m raid1 -d raid1 /dev/vdb # mount /dev/vdb /mnt # btrfs fi df /mnt Data: total=8.00MB, used=0.00 System, DUP: total=8.00MB, used=4.00KB System: total=4.00MB, used=0.00 Metadata, DUP: total=153.56MB, used=24.00KB Metadata:

I think I've addressed everything that was raised in review. Some of the highlights: - Callbacks should be freed reliably along all exit paths. - There's a simple test of closure lifetimes. - I've tried to use VALID|FREE in all the places where I'm confident that it's safe and correct to do. There may be more places. Note this is an optimization and shouldn't

On 7/16/19 6:04 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > A Closure is a list of (usually one, but can be more) closures. In C > there is also a singe ‘void *user_data’ parameter which is passed by > the caller into the function and through as the first parameter of > each callback invocation. > > By grouping the previously separate Opaque and Callback* parameters > together we can