similar to: Is the checkpoint interval adjustable?

I think I found a bug affecting btrfs filesystems and users invoking fstrim to discard unused blocks: if I execute a `fstrim -v /` twice, the amount trimmed does not change on the 2nd invocation AND it takes just as long as the first.  Why do I think this is a bug?  When I do the same on an ext4 partition I get different behavior: the output shows 0 B trimmed and it does is instantaneously when I

Hello everyone. The following patches are for Fedora 10(**). The distro-independent package will be put to kernel.org a bit later. I. Loading kernels from btrfs volumes Now you can load kernels and initrds from btrfs volumes composed of many devices. WARNING!!! Make sure that all components of your loading btrfs volume(*) are visible to grub. Otherwise, you''ll end with

I've had the chance to use a testsystem here and couldn't resist running a few benchmark programs on them: bonnie++, tiobench, dbench and a few generic ones (cp/rm/tar/etc...) on ext{234}, btrfs, jfs, ufs, xfs, zfs. All with standard mkfs/mount options and +noatime for all of them. Here are the results, no graphs - sorry: http://nerdbynature.de/benchmarks/v40z/2009-12-22/ Reiserfs

I've had the chance to use a testsystem here and couldn't resist running a few benchmark programs on them: bonnie++, tiobench, dbench and a few generic ones (cp/rm/tar/etc...) on ext{234}, btrfs, jfs, ufs, xfs, zfs. All with standard mkfs/mount options and +noatime for all of them. Here are the results, no graphs - sorry: http://nerdbynature.de/benchmarks/v40z/2009-12-22/ Reiserfs

Hello, My computer locked up and I had to press the reset button. Ever since then I can''t mount the btrfs filesystem, here''s the output: [ 37.645583] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [ 37.645598] WARNING: at fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c:1887 btrfs_remove_free_space+0x329/0x350 [btrfs]() [ 37.645600] Modules linked in: btrfs zlib_deflate libcrc32c ext4 jbd2 mbcache crc16

Hi List, so first the basics. I''m running Arch Linux with 3.13-rc2, btrfs-progs 0.20rc1.3-2 from the repo and I''m using a SSD. So I was having kernel panics with my USB 3.0 Gigabit card and was trying to get a panic output. These panics are intermittent and most often happen while using Chromium. Anyway so my system paniced while I was in Chromium. After the reboot Chromium

(switched to email. Please respond via emailed reply-to-all, not via the bugzilla web interface). On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 20:59:08 GMT bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote: > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26242 > > Summary: BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference > at (null) > Product: Memory Management >

I have a 4 device volume with raid5 - trying to remove one of the devices (plenty of free space) and I get an almost immediate segfault. Scrub shows no errors, repair show space cache invalid but nothing else (I remounted with clear cache to be safe). Lots of corrupt on bdev (for 3 out of 4 drives), but I have no file access issues that I know of. Thanks! Output below:

I''m currently researching an upgrade to (raid1-ed) btrfs from mostly reiserfs (which I''ve found quite reliable (even thru a period of bad ram and resulting system crashes) since data=ordered went in with 2.6.16 or whatever it was. (Thanks, Chris! =:^)) on multiple md/raid-1s. I have some questions that don''t appear to be addressed well on the wiki, yet, or where

Hi list, I don''t trust theoretical benchmarks that much and prefer "real-life benchs" on the occasion, so here''s mine: Given 4 laptops, the most powerful of which was running BTRFS and the others ext3 or ext4, all machines running Ubuntu 11.04 Natty 32-bit with a stock Ubuntu 2.6.38-11 kernel, all machines were given the following FS-intensive task : - Upgrade

Hi, when mounting an intentionally corrupted btrfs filesystem i get the following warning and bug message. The image can be found here www.cccmz.de/~snakebyte/btrfs.2.img.bck.bz2 [ 297.406152] device fsid e14cf01de423381a-4bd40b603870018a <6>devid 2147483649 transid 9 /dev/loop0 [ 297.411937] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [ 297.412207] WARNING: at fs/btrfs/disk-io.c:805

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

While untar''ing an image to an sd card via a reader, I got the following bug. The system also has a btrfs root, and a whole swath of processes went into uninterruptable sleep. I was able to poke around via ssh and sysrq, and already had netconsole set up to capture the bug. Root fs is on /dev/sdi1, and /dev/sdj2 is the card reader which was the target of the untar. [29571.448889] sd

Hallo, "never change a running system" ... For some months I run btrfs unter kernel 3.2.5 and 3.2.9, without problems. Yesterday I compiled kernel 3.3.4, and this morning I started the machine with this kernel. There may be some ugly problems. Copying something into the btrfs "directory" worked well for some files, and then I got error messages (I''ve not

Hello everyone, Btrfs v0.16 is available for download, please see http://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/ for download links and project information. v0.16 has a shiny new disk format, and is not compatible with filesystems created by older Btrfs releases. But, it should be the fastest Btrfs yet, with a wide variety of scalability fixes and new features. There were quite a few contributors this time

I''ve just pushed out a new integration branch to my git repo. This is purely bugfix patches -- there are no new features in this issue of the integration branch. I''ve got a stack of about a dozen more patches with new features in them still to go. I''ll be working on those tomorrow. As always, there''s minimal testing involved here, but it does at least compile on

i_alloc_sem has always been a bit of an odd "lock". It''s the only remaining rw_semaphore that can be released by a different thread than the one that locked it, and it''s use case in the core direct I/O code is more like a counter given that the writers already have external serialization. This series removes it in favour of a simpler counter scheme, thus getting rid

Hello btrfs! Recently I upgraded to 3.2.0-rc4 due to instabilities with my btrfs filesystem in 3.1.1. While with 3.1.1 my system completely froze, with 3.2.0-rc4 it stays at least somehow usable (for some strange reason my xorg screen turns black as soon as this happens, only ssh is working then). Scrubbing reports 1 uncorrectable error. I have this error since my system froze due to some

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

Just compiled a custom kernel, but unable to mount a btrfs partition. It essentially says ''unrecognized filesystem''. What could be missing? # File systems # CONFIG_EXT2_FS=y CONFIG_EXT2_FS_XATTR=y CONFIG_EXT2_FS_POSIX_ACL=y CONFIG_EXT2_FS_SECURITY=y # CONFIG_EXT2_FS_XIP is not set CONFIG_EXT3_FS=y CONFIG_EXT3_DEFAULTS_TO_ORDERED=y CONFIG_EXT3_FS_XATTR=y