linux-btrfs.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH] Btrfs: disable snapshot aware defrag for now
@ 2014-01-29 21:05 Josef Bacik
  2014-02-03 14:48 ` David Sterba
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Josef Bacik @ 2014-01-29 21:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-btrfs

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)
 			/* the inode is shared */
 			new = record_old_file_extents(inode, ordered_extent);
 
-- 
1.8.3.1


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: disable snapshot aware defrag for now
  2014-01-29 21:05 [PATCH] Btrfs: disable snapshot aware defrag for now Josef Bacik
@ 2014-02-03 14:48 ` David Sterba
  2014-02-03 17:27   ` Josef Bacik
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: David Sterba @ 2014-02-03 14:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Josef Bacik; +Cc: linux-btrfs

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.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: disable snapshot aware defrag for now
  2014-02-03 14:48 ` David Sterba
@ 2014-02-03 17:27   ` Josef Bacik
  2014-02-04  3:19     ` Roger Binns
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Josef Bacik @ 2014-02-03 17:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: dsterba, linux-btrfs


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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: disable snapshot aware defrag for now
  2014-02-03 17:27   ` Josef Bacik
@ 2014-02-04  3:19     ` Roger Binns
  2014-02-04 14:07       ` Josef Bacik
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Roger Binns @ 2014-02-04  3:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-btrfs

-----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-----


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: disable snapshot aware defrag for now
  2014-02-04  3:19     ` Roger Binns
@ 2014-02-04 14:07       ` Josef Bacik
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Josef Bacik @ 2014-02-04 14:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Roger Binns, linux-btrfs


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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2014-02-04 14:07 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-01-29 21:05 [PATCH] Btrfs: disable snapshot aware defrag for now Josef Bacik
2014-02-03 14:48 ` David Sterba
2014-02-03 17:27   ` Josef Bacik
2014-02-04  3:19     ` Roger Binns
2014-02-04 14:07       ` Josef Bacik

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).