1. 20 2月, 2013 1 次提交
  2. 17 12月, 2012 1 次提交
  3. 13 12月, 2012 9 次提交
  4. 29 8月, 2012 1 次提交
  5. 24 7月, 2012 2 次提交
  6. 03 7月, 2012 2 次提交
  7. 15 6月, 2012 1 次提交
    • J
      Btrfs: use rcu to protect device->name · 606686ee
      Josef Bacik 提交于
      Al pointed out that we can just toss out the old name on a device and add a
      new one arbitrarily, so anybody who uses device->name in printk could
      possibly use free'd memory.  Instead of adding locking around all of this he
      suggested doing it with RCU, so I've introduced a struct rcu_string that
      does just that and have gone through and protected all accesses to
      device->name that aren't under the uuid_mutex with rcu_read_lock().  This
      protects us and I will use it for dealing with removing the device that we
      used to mount the file system in a later patch.  Thanks,
      Reviewed-by: NDavid Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
      Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <josef@redhat.com>
      606686ee
  8. 30 5月, 2012 3 次提交
  9. 22 3月, 2012 1 次提交
  10. 17 1月, 2012 13 次提交
  11. 11 1月, 2012 1 次提交
  12. 20 11月, 2011 1 次提交
    • C
      Btrfs: fix barrier flushes · 387125fc
      Chris Mason 提交于
      When btrfs is writing the super blocks, it send barrier flushes to make
      sure writeback caching drives get all the metadata on disk in the
      right order.
      
      But, we have two bugs in the way these are sent down.  When doing
      full commits (not via the tree log), we are sending the barrier down
      before the last super when it should be going down before the first.
      
      In multi-device setups, we should be waiting for the barriers to
      complete on all devices before writing any of the supers.
      
      Both of these bugs can cause corruptions on power failures.  We fix it
      with some new code to send down empty barriers to all devices before
      writing the first super.
      
      Alexandre Oliva found the multi-device bug.  Arne Jansen did the async
      barrier loop.
      Signed-off-by: NChris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
      Reported-by: NAlexandre Oliva <oliva@lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
      387125fc
  13. 02 10月, 2011 1 次提交
  14. 29 9月, 2011 1 次提交
  15. 17 8月, 2011 1 次提交
    • J
      Btrfs: detect wether a device supports discard · d5e2003c
      Josef Bacik 提交于
      We have a problem where if a user specifies discard but doesn't actually support
      it we will return EOPNOTSUPP from btrfs_discard_extent.  This is a problem
      because this gets called (in a fashion) from the tree log recovery code, which
      has a nice little BUG_ON(ret) after it, which causes us to fail the tree log
      replay.  So instead detect wether our devices support discard when we're adding
      them and then don't issue discards if we know that the device doesn't support
      it.  And just for good measure set ret = 0 in btrfs_issue_discard just in case
      we still get EOPNOTSUPP so we don't screw anybody up like this again.  Thanks,
      Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <josef@redhat.com>
      Signed-off-by: NChris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
      d5e2003c
  16. 24 5月, 2011 1 次提交