Btrfs progs git repo on kernel.org

Btrfs progs git repo on kernel.org

[Chris Mason]

Hi everyone,

I've pulled in Hugo's integration tree, minus the features that were not
yet in the kernel.  This also has a few small commits that I had queued
up outside of the fsck work.

Hugo, many thanks for keeping up the integration tree!  Taking out the
features not in the kernel meant I had to rebase it the commits, I'm
sorry about that.

The code from the integration tree is here:

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-progs.git

My next step is to push out a branch with Josef's recovery tool
integrated in.  I'm spending some time adding my metadata scanning code
with his, and trying to clean up things for a real beta fsck release.

-chris

Re: Btrfs progs git repo on kernel.org

[Hugo Mills]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2282 bytes --]

On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 11:27:07AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> I've pulled in Hugo's integration tree, minus the features that were not
> yet in the kernel.  This also has a few small commits that I had queued
> up outside of the fsck work.
> 
> Hugo, many thanks for keeping up the integration tree!  Taking out the
> features not in the kernel meant I had to rebase it the commits, I'm
> sorry about that.

   OK, I'm sure I can cope with that. I'll just drop the patches from
my stack that you've already brought in, and generate a new
integration branch based on your master. I've got 4-5 other patches to
add in as well, gleaned from the mailing list and, via David Sterba,
from SuSE's local patches.

   I've also got the basis of a set of regression tests for -progs,
which I'll send out patches for in the next couple of days. At the
moment, it only tests building and snapshots, but should be relatively
easily extensible to the other bits of ./btrfs (although I'm not sure
how we can easily and repeatably test the recovery tools).

   One other thing that's *really* needed is a new version tag, which
I was going to do this weekend, but it looks like you're back at the
helm of -progs, so I'll just whine in your general direction instead.

   I'll try to keep up with the integration branch still, and feed
public patches I pull off the mailing list through to you, if that's
going to continue to be useful. At the moment, though, I'm doing very
little in the way of active review on these patches, so the fact that
a patch is in integration-* doesn't necessarily mean that it's passed
any kind of quality check from me.

> The code from the integration tree is here:
> 
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-progs.git
> 
> My next step is to push out a branch with Josef's recovery tool
> integrated in.  I'm spending some time adding my metadata scanning code
> with his, and trying to clean up things for a real beta fsck release.

   Looking forward to it. :)

   Hugo.

-- 
=== Hugo Mills: hugo@... carfax.org.uk | darksatanic.net | lug.org.uk ===
  PGP key: 515C238D from wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net or http://www.carfax.org.uk
       --- Great oxymorons of the world, no. 4: Future Perfect ---       

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 190 bytes --]

Re: Btrfs progs git repo on kernel.org

[Chris Mason]

On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 04:58:54PM +0100, Hugo Mills wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 11:27:07AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > I've pulled in Hugo's integration tree, minus the features that were not
> > yet in the kernel.  This also has a few small commits that I had queued
> > up outside of the fsck work.
> > 
> > Hugo, many thanks for keeping up the integration tree!  Taking out the
> > features not in the kernel meant I had to rebase it the commits, I'm
> > sorry about that.
> 
>    OK, I'm sure I can cope with that. I'll just drop the patches from
> my stack that you've already brought in, and generate a new
> integration branch based on your master. I've got 4-5 other patches to
> add in as well, gleaned from the mailing list and, via David Sterba,
> from SuSE's local patches.
> 
>    I've also got the basis of a set of regression tests for -progs,
> which I'll send out patches for in the next couple of days. At the
> moment, it only tests building and snapshots, but should be relatively
> easily extensible to the other bits of ./btrfs (although I'm not sure
> how we can easily and repeatably test the recovery tools).

Please talk with Anand Jain on the test programs, he has been making
scripts for xfs-tests.

> 
>    One other thing that's *really* needed is a new version tag, which
> I was going to do this weekend, but it looks like you're back at the
> helm of -progs, so I'll just whine in your general direction instead.

Definitely, fsck deserves a new version tag.

> 
>    I'll try to keep up with the integration branch still, and feed
> public patches I pull off the mailing list through to you, if that's
> going to continue to be useful. At the moment, though, I'm doing very
> little in the way of active review on these patches, so the fact that
> a patch is in integration-* doesn't necessarily mean that it's passed
> any kind of quality check from me.

That's great, it still helps.

-chris

Re: Btrfs progs git repo on kernel.org

[Hugo Mills]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2296 bytes --]

On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 05:32:58PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 04:58:54PM +0100, Hugo Mills wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 11:27:07AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > > I've pulled in Hugo's integration tree, minus the features that were not
> > > yet in the kernel.  This also has a few small commits that I had queued
> > > up outside of the fsck work.
> > > 
> > > Hugo, many thanks for keeping up the integration tree!  Taking out the
> > > features not in the kernel meant I had to rebase it the commits, I'm
> > > sorry about that.
> > 
> >    OK, I'm sure I can cope with that. I'll just drop the patches from
> > my stack that you've already brought in, and generate a new
> > integration branch based on your master. I've got 4-5 other patches to
> > add in as well, gleaned from the mailing list and, via David Sterba,
> > from SuSE's local patches.
> > 
> >    I've also got the basis of a set of regression tests for -progs,
> > which I'll send out patches for in the next couple of days. At the
> > moment, it only tests building and snapshots, but should be relatively
> > easily extensible to the other bits of ./btrfs (although I'm not sure
> > how we can easily and repeatably test the recovery tools).
> 
> Please talk with Anand Jain on the test programs, he has been making
> scripts for xfs-tests.

   Will do, although I think we're aiming at different things. I'm
very definitely *not* attempting to test the filesystem itself with my
test harness. I just want to exercise all the bits of the userspace
tools that I can. (This was primarily triggered by the mess
surrounding the parsing of "btrfs sub snap" parameters).

> >    One other thing that's *really* needed is a new version tag, which
> > I was going to do this weekend, but it looks like you're back at the
> > helm of -progs, so I'll just whine in your general direction instead.
> 
> Definitely, fsck deserves a new version tag.

   You mean we've got to wait *that* long? ;)

   Hugo.

-- 
=== Hugo Mills: hugo@... carfax.org.uk | darksatanic.net | lug.org.uk ===
  PGP key: 515C238D from wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net or http://www.carfax.org.uk
     --- "I don't like the look of it,  I tell you." "Well, stop ---     
                          looking at it, then."                          

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 190 bytes --]

Re: Btrfs progs git repo on kernel.org

[Anand Jain]

>>>     I've also got the basis of a set of regression tests for -progs,
>>> which I'll send out patches for in the next couple of days. At the
>>> moment, it only tests building and snapshots, but should be relatively
>>> easily extensible to the other bits of ./btrfs (although I'm not sure
>>> how we can easily and repeatably test the recovery tools).
>>
>> Please talk with Anand Jain on the test programs, he has been making
>> scripts for xfs-tests.
>
>     Will do, although I think we're aiming at different things. I'm
> very definitely *not* attempting to test the filesystem itself with my
> test harness. I just want to exercise all the bits of the userspace
> tools that I can. (This was primarily triggered by the mess
> surrounding the parsing of "btrfs sub snap" parameters).

  Testing the (btrfs) CLI wasn't aimed in the xfs-tests instead the
  FS itself.
  Appears that btrfs CLI syntax-change is upcoming what we might also
  need is a CLI to check the version of both btrfs and btrfs-progs
  to ensure tools surrounding them will report -incompatible instead
  of syntax error.

thanks. -Anand

Re: Btrfs progs git repo on kernel.org

[Sergei Trofimovich]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 753 bytes --]

> Hi everyone,
> 
> I've pulled in Hugo's integration tree, minus the features that were not
> yet in the kernel.  This also has a few small commits that I had queued
> up outside of the fsck work.
> 
> Hugo, many thanks for keeping up the integration tree!  Taking out the
> features not in the kernel meant I had to rebase it the commits, I'm
> sorry about that.
> 
> The code from the integration tree is here:
> 
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-progs.git

Sounds great! Should we treat is as new home of a thing called "-unstable" before?

    git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-progs-unstable.git

Or you are planning to restore that repo as well?

Thanks!

-- 

  Sergei

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: Btrfs progs git repo on kernel.org

[Chris Mason]

On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 07:27:56PM +0300, Sergei Trofimovich wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> > 
> > I've pulled in Hugo's integration tree, minus the features that were not
> > yet in the kernel.  This also has a few small commits that I had queued
> > up outside of the fsck work.
> > 
> > Hugo, many thanks for keeping up the integration tree!  Taking out the
> > features not in the kernel meant I had to rebase it the commits, I'm
> > sorry about that.
> > 
> > The code from the integration tree is here:
> > 
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-progs.git
> 
> Sounds great! Should we treat is as new home of a thing called "-unstable" before?
> 
>     git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-progs-unstable.git
> 
> Or you are planning to restore that repo as well?

That's a good point, I'll see if I can make the -unstable a link.  Still
figuring out the new git interface.

But yes, this is the new home of the progs.

-chris

Re: Btrfs progs git repo on kernel.org

[Phillip Susi]

On 10/27/2011 11:27 AM, Chris Mason wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I've pulled in Hugo's integration tree, minus the features that were not
> yet in the kernel.  This also has a few small commits that I had queued
> up outside of the fsck work.
>
> Hugo, many thanks for keeping up the integration tree!  Taking out the
> features not in the kernel meant I had to rebase it the commits, I'm
> sorry about that.
>
> The code from the integration tree is here:
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-progs.git

I notice that there are no tags in the repo.  Did you just forget to 
push them, or have they been lost?  Also the repository description 
still needs filled out.