From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from magic.merlins.org ([209.81.13.136]:50420 "EHLO mail1.merlins.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753342AbbDTOt4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Apr 2015 10:49:56 -0400 Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 07:49:28 -0700 From: Marc MERLIN To: Hugo Mills , =?iso-8859-1?Q?=22N=E9moz_Saint-Dizier=2C_Olivier=22?= , linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20150420144928.GT1258@merlins.org> References: <5534D201.7080803@onsd.eu> <20150420102705.GF18187@carfax.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20150420102705.GF18187@carfax.org.uk> Subject: Is btrfs on top of bcache stable now? Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 10:27:05AM +0000, Hugo Mills wrote: > See the first issue here: https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Gotchas Hi Hugo, looking at the page again, I see "bcache + btrfs does not seem to be stable yet" linking to a thread more than 2 years old and btrfs kernels that wouldn't be stable without bcache anyway. I've seen others mention they switched to bcache recently and not seen new "it's broken" reports. So, is it ok 1) to assume bcache and btrfs play ok together now? 2) remove the warning from that gotchas page? Thanks, Marc -- "A mouse is a device used to point at the xterm you want to type in" - A.S.R. Microsoft is to operating systems .... .... what McDonalds is to gourmet cooking Home page: http://marc.merlins.org/ | PGP 1024R/763BE901