From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from rcsinet15.oracle.com ([148.87.113.117]:26772 "EHLO rcsinet15.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933964Ab2KAQCC (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Nov 2012 12:02:02 -0400 Message-ID: <50929CF4.9060206@oracle.com> Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2012 00:01:56 +0800 From: Liu Bo MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Itaru Kitayama CC: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2 v4] Btrfs: snapshot-aware defrag References: <1351333721-3220-1-git-send-email-bo.li.liu@oracle.com> <50911FC0.4080104@oracle.com> <20121101112114.GA4328@liubo.cn.oracle.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 11/01/2012 10:05 PM, Itaru Kitayama wrote: > Hi Liubo: > > The V4 leaves only warnings from btrfs_destroy_inode(). So, you think > it's normal > an "old" extent recorded can be removed from the extent tree by the time > relink_file_extents() invoked? > Yeah, it could be if only we run delayed refs in time. But I don't think that often happens since we run delayed refs when the amount reaches its limit(64). thanks, liubo > Itaru > > On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 8:21 PM, Liu Bo wrote: > >> The current btrfs-next HEAD actually have included this v4 patch, so >> just pull btrfs-next and give it a shot :) >> >> thanks, >> liubo > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >