similar to: BTRFS error after clearing cache

Rename no_space_cache option to nospace_cache to be more consistent with the rest, where the simple prefix ''no'' is used to negate an option. The option has been introduced during the -rc1 cycle and there are has not been widely used, so it''s safe. Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz> --- fs/btrfs/super.c | 4 ++-- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2

I am new to syslinux/extlinux. Can I boot from a linux btrfs subvolume? I am getting "Failed to load ldlinux.c32" when I attempt to boot from a btrfs subvolume. Setup: 1) I have a USB disk with one partition. The partition is marked "active". 2) I make a btrfs filesystem with "mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdd1". I mount the partiton and execute "btrfs su create root".

I am new to syslinux/extlinux. Can I boot from a linux btrfs subvolume? I am getting "Failed to load ldlinux.c32" when I attempt to boot from a btrfs subvolume. Setup: 1) I have a USB disk with one partition. The partition is marked "active". 2) I make a btrfs filesystem with "mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdd1". I mount the partiton and execute "btrfs su create

I am new to syslinux/extlinux. Can I boot from a linux btrfs subvolume? I am getting "Failed to load ldlinux.c32" when I attempt to boot from a btrfs subvolume. Setup: 1) I have a USB disk with one partition. The partition is marked "active". 2) I make a btrfs filesystem with "mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdd1". I mount the partiton and execute "btrfs su create

Hi all, I had been clearing the space cache on my btrfs vol (Debian 3.10.11-1 btrfs-tools 2013-7-5) by changing the fstab to "nospace_cache, clear_cache". I ran btrfsck --repair and it said: "cache and super generation don''t match, space cache will be invalidated." Can one of the dev''s please tell me whether that message means that the space cache

Hi all, I''m running btrfs in a 3-disk RAID1 configuration. After a hard power-off, I''m seeing a lot of hung I/O tasks on this volume, apparently due to a corrupt leaf. I first noticed the problem on kernel 3.4.7, and it''s persisted with 3.4.8. Relevant parts of the kernel log follow. [ 85.179621] block group 38684065792 has an wrong amount of free space [

I''m trying to figure out how to clear the for a worker from my controller. In my aysnc_xxx process I set cache[key]. However, I don''t see an easy way to clear the cache from a controller with invoking something on the worker. What I was looking for was something like MiddleMan(:worker_name, :worker_key_name).cache[key]= Is there something like that and I''m just

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

In trfs-progs 4.4 the error message has been changed, and our check did not work anymore. Yes, parsing user messages really sucks... --- daemon/btrfs.c | 7 +++++-- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/daemon/btrfs.c b/daemon/btrfs.c index 85dbe00..c67af83 100644 --- a/daemon/btrfs.c +++ b/daemon/btrfs.c @@ -1029,9 +1029,12 @@ do_btrfs_subvolume_show (const char

Greetings all, I see the following issue during snap creation under IO: Transaction commit calls btrfs_start_delalloc_inodes() that locks the delalloc_inodes list, fetches the first inode, unlocks the list, triggers btrfs_alloc_delalloc_work/btrfs_queue_worker for this inode and then locks the list again. Then it checks the head of the list again. In my case, this is always exactly the same

Hi All, (retrying to post again - somehow message got blocked) I am running 3.2.7-1.fc16.x86_64 (latest FC 16 kernel) I posted regarding this problem earlier, but after some research and found improvement with new kernel version. so I decided to repost in a new thread to clean things up... The intention of this post is to hopefully be useful and point out some performance numbers that devs can

Hi, Doing some extensive benchmarks on BTRFS, I encountered a kernel bug in BTRFS (as reported in dmesg) Maybe the information below can help you making btrfs better. Situation Doing an intensive sequential write on a SAS 3TB disk drive (SEAGATE ST33000652SS) with 128 threads with Sysbench. Device is connected through an HBA. Blocksize was 256k ; Kernel is 3.3.0 (x86_64) ; Btrfs is version

I am new to syslinux/extlinux. Can I boot from a linux btrfs subvolume? I am getting "Failed to load ldlinux.c32" when I attempt to boot from a btrfs subvolume. Setup: 1) I have a USB disk with one partition. The partition is marked "active". 2) I make a btrfs filesystem with "mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdd1". I mount the partiton and execute "btrfs su create

projects/compiler-rt/lib/builtins/clear_cache.c I suggest two small changes here. 1. Mark it however required to avoid inlining, i.e. for the x86/amd64 case. Control transfer is required. I realize it is likely anyway, you aren't likely to "fall from" the caller into the code. 2. #elif defined(_WIN32) && (defined(__arm__) || defined(__aarch64__)) be changed to just: #elif

As mentioned on Google+, I have a partition that I can no longer mount normally, containing a lot of my personal data and all backups from my laptop. I found now that I am still able to mount it using the ''nospace_cache'' option, but it takes a couple of minutes and I get "INFO: task btrfs-transacti:1698 blocked for more than 120 seconds." messages reporting the thread

On Mon, 2011-04-25 at 22:05 +0200, Maik Zumstrull wrote: > Package: linux-image-2.6.39-rc4-686-pae > Version: 2.6.39~rc4-1~experimental.1 > Severity: normal > Tags: experimental > > By simply stressing the system with some I/O, I can make it crash within > seconds. I''m not setting a higher severity because the bug is in an > experimental file system in an

When adding orphans to an inode''s root, we start a transaction for that root that when ended in several places such as for example extent-tree.c:btrfs_remove_block_group(), inode.c:btrfs_unlink() and inode.c:btrfs_evict_node(), doesn''t result in a commit, that is, inode.c:btrfs_orphan_commit_root() doesn''t get called (via transaction.c:commit_fs_roots()). The respective

Hi, What is the reason for excluding clear_cache.c from ARM builds of compiler_rt? Where __clear_cache is defined in that case? Thanks, Damjan

Folks, To implement this bug: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=19142 I need an LLVM intrinsic to communicate the need to lower the builtin wither to noop or a call or even a sequence of instructions. I thought about: void @llvm.clear_cache(i8 * begin, i8 * end) to simulate precisely GCC's builtin: void __builtin___clear_cache (char *begin, char *end) which will be, by default,

In btrfs if we mount with "compress" we have no way to disable compressing by remounting (mount -o remount /mnt/btrfs), only by unmounting and mounting without "compress". This patch adds "nocompress" mount option which can be used to remount the filesystem without compression: # mount -o remount,nocompress /mnt/btrfs This option is usefull in cases when we have a