| Message ID | 1391029530-17686-1-git-send-email-jbacik@fb.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 04:05:30PM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote: > It's just broken and it's taking a lot of effort to fix it, so for now just > disable it so people can defrag in peace. Thanks, > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> > --- > fs/btrfs/inode.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c > index 3b65987..8c0bc31 100644 > --- a/fs/btrfs/inode.c > +++ b/fs/btrfs/inode.c > @@ -2628,7 +2628,7 @@ static int btrfs_finish_ordered_io(struct btrfs_ordered_extent *ordered_extent) > EXTENT_DEFRAG, 1, cached_state); > if (ret) { > u64 last_snapshot = btrfs_root_last_snapshot(&root->root_item); > - if (last_snapshot >= BTRFS_I(inode)->generation) > + if (0 && last_snapshot >= BTRFS_I(inode)->generation) That's not very flexible, how are we supposed to test that in the meantime? Editing sources is not the peferred way. I was thinking about adding a config option that would cover any experimental/broken features, this one be the first, as we currently have no other way to disable it. I'd rather avoid adding a temporary mount option. -- 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 at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 02/03/2014 09:48 AM, David Sterba wrote: > On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 04:05:30PM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote: >> It's just broken and it's taking a lot of effort to fix it, so for now just >> disable it so people can defrag in peace. Thanks, >> >> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org >> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> >> --- >> fs/btrfs/inode.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c >> index 3b65987..8c0bc31 100644 >> --- a/fs/btrfs/inode.c >> +++ b/fs/btrfs/inode.c >> @@ -2628,7 +2628,7 @@ static int btrfs_finish_ordered_io(struct btrfs_ordered_extent *ordered_extent) >> EXTENT_DEFRAG, 1, cached_state); >> if (ret) { >> u64 last_snapshot = btrfs_root_last_snapshot(&root->root_item); >> - if (last_snapshot >= BTRFS_I(inode)->generation) >> + if (0 && last_snapshot >= BTRFS_I(inode)->generation) > That's not very flexible, how are we supposed to test that in the > meantime? Editing sources is not the peferred way. Well since I'm the only one currently working on fixing it I'm not worried about it. If anybody else wants to fix it they can easily change it themselves. It is so totally broken that I don't want it being turned on by anybody who can't edit this and change it themselves. Thanks, Josef -- 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 at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 03/02/14 09:27, Josef Bacik wrote: > It is so totally broken that I don't want it being turned on by anybody > who can't edit this and change it themselves. The symptoms I saw are huge amounts of kernel memory consumption, possibly till exhaustion of swap. Are there other ways in which is it broken (eg corruption)? Also is this patch making its way to the various stables? Roger -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlLwXE8ACgkQmOOfHg372QRLngCgpc445lPvM7YhGUxVdlU2O4vN 1CUAoM2NmeGPOeYxOji4yL4VRysBnTxg =sQ3M -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- 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 at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 02/03/2014 10:19 PM, Roger Binns wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 03/02/14 09:27, Josef Bacik wrote: >> It is so totally broken that I don't want it being turned on by anybody >> who can't edit this and change it themselves. > The symptoms I saw are huge amounts of kernel memory consumption, possibly > till exhaustion of swap. Are there other ways in which is it broken (eg > corruption)? > > Also is this patch making its way to the various stables? No corruption, and frankly if you had just small files and a small number of snapshots it worked just fine, but otherwise it would use all of your ram. I cc'ed stable@ so it should make it back to all the stables. Thanks, Josef -- 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 at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c index 3b65987..8c0bc31 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/inode.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/inode.c @@ -2628,7 +2628,7 @@ static int btrfs_finish_ordered_io(struct btrfs_ordered_extent *ordered_extent) EXTENT_DEFRAG, 1, cached_state); if (ret) { u64 last_snapshot = btrfs_root_last_snapshot(&root->root_item); - if (last_snapshot >= BTRFS_I(inode)->generation) + if (0 && last_snapshot >= BTRFS_I(inode)->generation) /* the inode is shared */ new = record_old_file_extents(inode, ordered_extent);
It's just broken and it's taking a lot of effort to fix it, so for now just disable it so people can defrag in peace. Thanks, Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> --- fs/btrfs/inode.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)