From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5D67C433F5 for ; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 09:31:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACCE9604AC for ; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 09:31:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230035AbhINJdI (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Sep 2021 05:33:08 -0400 Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de ([195.135.220.29]:47308 "EHLO smtp-out2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229581AbhINJdI (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Sep 2021 05:33:08 -0400 Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E12A1FDD3; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 09:31:50 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1631611910; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=APRvrED9rvtWowSBxY3ndU1jLjDW+kpj/G+go1Op1DM=; b=GA5flshiFNolX5I/VSweV8c6V1RPibZWu2UEKOS6bY4s/DnQEgNaN9nSeup8HNUmWPSTCe angSNnmgIWFAMg66uDUG09e1t/tbOnso1fQt1+Ci1fabi7xIv0TfRdkUC3Wb/XRdDxAhbo zsUFdCsiS6uhW4mV/dg8fNuS/1l/R0E= Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A81F13E55; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 09:31:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id vomLOwVsQGFXRgAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Tue, 14 Sep 2021 09:31:49 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Implement progs support for removing received uuid on RW vols To: Qu Wenruo , linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org References: <20210914090558.79411-1-nborisov@suse.com> From: Nikolay Borisov Message-ID: <0dd22937-8879-af0f-df90-4ceb20d7d449@suse.com> Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2021 12:31:49 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org On 14.09.21 г. 12:30, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > > On 2021/9/14 下午5:05, Nikolay Borisov wrote: >> Here's V2 which takes into account Qu's suggestions, namely: >> >> - Add a helper which contains the common code to clear receive-related >> data >> - Now there is a single patch which impements the check/clear for both >> orig and >> lowmem modes >> - Added Reviewed-by from Qu. >> >> >> Nikolay Borisov (8): >>    btrfs-progs: Add btrfs_is_empty_uuid >>    btrfs-progs: Remove root argument from btrfs_fixup_low_keys >>    btrfs-progs: Remove fs_info argument from leaf_data_end >>    btrfs-progs: Remove root argument from btrfs_truncate_item >>    btrfs-progs: Add btrfs_uuid_tree_remove >>    btrfs-progs: Implement helper to remove received information of RW >>      subvol >>    btrfs-progs: check: Implement removing received data for RW subvols >>    btrfs-progs: tests: Add test for received information removal >> >>   check/main.c                                  |  21 +++- >>   check/mode-common.c                           |  40 ++++++++ >>   check/mode-common.h                           |   1 + >>   check/mode-lowmem.c                           |  11 ++- >>   kernel-shared/ctree.c                         |  62 +++++------- >>   kernel-shared/ctree.h                         |  12 ++- >>   kernel-shared/dir-item.c                      |   2 +- >>   kernel-shared/extent-tree.c                   |   2 +- >>   kernel-shared/file-item.c                     |   4 +- >>   kernel-shared/inode-item.c                    |   4 +- >>   kernel-shared/uuid-tree.c                     |  93 ++++++++++++++++++ >>   .../050-subvol-recv-clear/test.raw.xz         | Bin 0 -> 493524 bytes > > The image looks a little large than expected, so that the mailing list > is rejected the armored patch. > > Can we use btrfs-image? As there is no need for special layout which > can't be dumped by btrfs-image. > Thus using btrfs-image -c9 would save quite some space. Well I did use a raw image, compressed with xz. But sure, I'll look into this but for the time being will wait to gather more feedback. > > Thanks, > Qu > >>   12 files changed, 202 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-) >>   create mode 100644 tests/fsck-tests/050-subvol-recv-clear/test.raw.xz >> >> -- >> 2.17.1 >> >