* [PATCH] Btrfs: add missing inode item update in fallocate()
@ 2015-03-12 15:36 Filipe Manana
2015-03-12 23:23 ` [PATCH v2] " Filipe Manana
2015-03-13 8:11 ` [PATCH] " Liu Bo
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Filipe Manana @ 2015-03-12 15:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-btrfs; +Cc: Filipe Manana
If we fallocate(), without the keep size flag, into an area already covered
by an extent previously fallocated, we were updating the inode's i_size but
we weren't updating the inode item in the fs/subvol tree. A following umount
+ mount would result in a loss of the inode's size (and an fsync would miss
too the fact that the inode changed).
Reproducer:
$ mkfs.btrfs -f /dev/sdd
$ mount /dev/sdd /mnt
$ fallocate -n -l 1M /mnt/foobar
$ fallocate -l 512K /mnt/foobar
$ umount /mnt
$ mount /dev/sdd /mnt
$ od -t x1 /mnt/foobar
0000000
The expected result is:
$ od -t x1 /mnt/foobar
0000000 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
*
2000000
A test case for fstests follows soon.
Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
---
fs/btrfs/file.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++-----
1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/file.c b/fs/btrfs/file.c
index 8f256b1..fb4bd79 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/file.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/file.c
@@ -2677,13 +2677,10 @@ static long btrfs_fallocate(struct file *file, int mode,
1 << inode->i_blkbits,
offset + len,
&alloc_hint);
-
- if (ret < 0) {
- free_extent_map(em);
- break;
- }
} else if (actual_end > inode->i_size &&
!(mode & FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE)) {
+ struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans;
+
/*
* We didn't need to allocate any more space, but we
* still extended the size of the file so we need to
@@ -2692,8 +2689,22 @@ static long btrfs_fallocate(struct file *file, int mode,
inode->i_ctime = CURRENT_TIME;
i_size_write(inode, actual_end);
btrfs_ordered_update_i_size(inode, actual_end, NULL);
+ /* 1 unit for inode item */
+ trans = btrfs_start_transaction(root, 1);
+ if (IS_ERR(trans)) {
+ ret = PTR_ERR(trans);
+ } else {
+ ret = btrfs_update_inode(trans, root, inode);
+ if (ret)
+ btrfs_end_transaction(trans, root);
+ else
+ ret = btrfs_end_transaction(trans,
+ root);
+ }
}
free_extent_map(em);
+ if (ret < 0)
+ break;
cur_offset = last_byte;
if (cur_offset >= alloc_end) {
--
2.1.3
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2] Btrfs: add missing inode item update in fallocate()
2015-03-12 15:36 [PATCH] Btrfs: add missing inode item update in fallocate() Filipe Manana
@ 2015-03-12 23:23 ` Filipe Manana
2015-03-14 16:41 ` Liu Bo
2015-03-13 8:11 ` [PATCH] " Liu Bo
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Filipe Manana @ 2015-03-12 23:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-btrfs; +Cc: Filipe Manana
If we fallocate(), without the keep size flag, into an area already covered
by an extent previously fallocated, we were updating the inode's i_size but
we weren't updating the inode item in the fs/subvol tree. A following umount
+ mount would result in a loss of the inode's size (and an fsync would miss
too the fact that the inode changed).
Reproducer:
$ mkfs.btrfs -f /dev/sdd
$ mount /dev/sdd /mnt
$ fallocate -n -l 1M /mnt/foobar
$ fallocate -l 512K /mnt/foobar
$ umount /mnt
$ mount /dev/sdd /mnt
$ od -t x1 /mnt/foobar
0000000
The expected result is:
$ od -t x1 /mnt/foobar
0000000 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
*
2000000
A test case for fstests follows soon.
Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
---
V2: Update the inode's sizes and ctime while holding a transaction
open.
fs/btrfs/file.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++---------
1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/file.c b/fs/btrfs/file.c
index 8f256b1..c261ff0 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/file.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/file.c
@@ -2677,23 +2677,34 @@ static long btrfs_fallocate(struct file *file, int mode,
1 << inode->i_blkbits,
offset + len,
&alloc_hint);
-
- if (ret < 0) {
- free_extent_map(em);
- break;
- }
} else if (actual_end > inode->i_size &&
!(mode & FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE)) {
+ struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans;
+
/*
* We didn't need to allocate any more space, but we
* still extended the size of the file so we need to
- * update i_size.
+ * update i_size and the inode item.
*/
- inode->i_ctime = CURRENT_TIME;
- i_size_write(inode, actual_end);
- btrfs_ordered_update_i_size(inode, actual_end, NULL);
+ trans = btrfs_start_transaction(root, 1);
+ if (IS_ERR(trans)) {
+ ret = PTR_ERR(trans);
+ } else {
+ inode->i_ctime = CURRENT_TIME;
+ i_size_write(inode, actual_end);
+ btrfs_ordered_update_i_size(inode, actual_end,
+ NULL);
+ ret = btrfs_update_inode(trans, root, inode);
+ if (ret)
+ btrfs_end_transaction(trans, root);
+ else
+ ret = btrfs_end_transaction(trans,
+ root);
+ }
}
free_extent_map(em);
+ if (ret < 0)
+ break;
cur_offset = last_byte;
if (cur_offset >= alloc_end) {
--
2.1.3
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: add missing inode item update in fallocate()
2015-03-12 15:36 [PATCH] Btrfs: add missing inode item update in fallocate() Filipe Manana
2015-03-12 23:23 ` [PATCH v2] " Filipe Manana
@ 2015-03-13 8:11 ` Liu Bo
2015-03-13 8:59 ` Filipe David Manana
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Liu Bo @ 2015-03-13 8:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Filipe Manana; +Cc: linux-btrfs
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 03:36:58PM +0000, Filipe Manana wrote:
> If we fallocate(), without the keep size flag, into an area already covered
> by an extent previously fallocated, we were updating the inode's i_size but
> we weren't updating the inode item in the fs/subvol tree. A following umount
> + mount would result in a loss of the inode's size (and an fsync would miss
> too the fact that the inode changed).
>
> Reproducer:
>
> $ mkfs.btrfs -f /dev/sdd
> $ mount /dev/sdd /mnt
> $ fallocate -n -l 1M /mnt/foobar
> $ fallocate -l 512K /mnt/foobar
> $ umount /mnt
> $ mount /dev/sdd /mnt
> $ od -t x1 /mnt/foobar
> 0000000
>
> The expected result is:
>
> $ od -t x1 /mnt/foobar
> 0000000 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> *
> 2000000
>
> A test case for fstests follows soon.
>
> Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
> ---
> fs/btrfs/file.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/file.c b/fs/btrfs/file.c
> index 8f256b1..fb4bd79 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/file.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/file.c
> @@ -2677,13 +2677,10 @@ static long btrfs_fallocate(struct file *file, int mode,
> 1 << inode->i_blkbits,
> offset + len,
> &alloc_hint);
> -
> - if (ret < 0) {
> - free_extent_map(em);
> - break;
> - }
> } else if (actual_end > inode->i_size &&
> !(mode & FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE)) {
> + struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans;
> +
> /*
> * We didn't need to allocate any more space, but we
> * still extended the size of the file so we need to
> @@ -2692,8 +2689,22 @@ static long btrfs_fallocate(struct file *file, int mode,
> inode->i_ctime = CURRENT_TIME;
> i_size_write(inode, actual_end);
> btrfs_ordered_update_i_size(inode, actual_end, NULL);
> + /* 1 unit for inode item */
> + trans = btrfs_start_transaction(root, 1);
> + if (IS_ERR(trans)) {
> + ret = PTR_ERR(trans);
I prefer putting this earlier, before i_size updates, to
protect us from another isize inconsistence(disk_i_size, isize vs isize in inode_item).
Basically I mean,
...
trans = btrfs_start_transaction(root, 1);
if (IS_ERR(trans)) {
ret = PTR_ERR(trans);
} else {
inode->i_ctime = CURRENT_TIME;
...
}
> + } else {
> + ret = btrfs_update_inode(trans, root, inode);
> + if (ret)
> + btrfs_end_transaction(trans, root);
> + else
> + ret = btrfs_end_transaction(trans,
> + root);
calling same end_transaction() for two times seems kind of weird for me,
what about this?
ret2 = btrfs_end_transaction(trans, root);
if (!ret)
ret = ret2;
But anyway, I'm okay with both.
Thanks,
-liubo
> }
> free_extent_map(em);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + break;
>
> cur_offset = last_byte;
> if (cur_offset >= alloc_end) {
> --
> 2.1.3
>
> --
> 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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: add missing inode item update in fallocate()
2015-03-13 8:11 ` [PATCH] " Liu Bo
@ 2015-03-13 8:59 ` Filipe David Manana
2015-03-13 9:02 ` Filipe David Manana
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Filipe David Manana @ 2015-03-13 8:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Liu Bo; +Cc: Filipe Manana, linux-btrfs
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 8:11 AM, Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 03:36:58PM +0000, Filipe Manana wrote:
>> If we fallocate(), without the keep size flag, into an area already covered
>> by an extent previously fallocated, we were updating the inode's i_size but
>> we weren't updating the inode item in the fs/subvol tree. A following umount
>> + mount would result in a loss of the inode's size (and an fsync would miss
>> too the fact that the inode changed).
>>
>> Reproducer:
>>
>> $ mkfs.btrfs -f /dev/sdd
>> $ mount /dev/sdd /mnt
>> $ fallocate -n -l 1M /mnt/foobar
>> $ fallocate -l 512K /mnt/foobar
>> $ umount /mnt
>> $ mount /dev/sdd /mnt
>> $ od -t x1 /mnt/foobar
>> 0000000
>>
>> The expected result is:
>>
>> $ od -t x1 /mnt/foobar
>> 0000000 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
>> *
>> 2000000
>>
>> A test case for fstests follows soon.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
>> ---
>> fs/btrfs/file.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++-----
>> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/file.c b/fs/btrfs/file.c
>> index 8f256b1..fb4bd79 100644
>> --- a/fs/btrfs/file.c
>> +++ b/fs/btrfs/file.c
>> @@ -2677,13 +2677,10 @@ static long btrfs_fallocate(struct file *file, int mode,
>> 1 << inode->i_blkbits,
>> offset + len,
>> &alloc_hint);
>> -
>> - if (ret < 0) {
>> - free_extent_map(em);
>> - break;
>> - }
>> } else if (actual_end > inode->i_size &&
>> !(mode & FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE)) {
>> + struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans;
>> +
>> /*
>> * We didn't need to allocate any more space, but we
>> * still extended the size of the file so we need to
>> @@ -2692,8 +2689,22 @@ static long btrfs_fallocate(struct file *file, int mode,
>> inode->i_ctime = CURRENT_TIME;
>> i_size_write(inode, actual_end);
>> btrfs_ordered_update_i_size(inode, actual_end, NULL);
>> + /* 1 unit for inode item */
>> + trans = btrfs_start_transaction(root, 1);
>> + if (IS_ERR(trans)) {
>> + ret = PTR_ERR(trans);
>
> I prefer putting this earlier, before i_size updates, to
> protect us from another isize inconsistence(disk_i_size, isize vs isize in inode_item).
I don't think that's a problem at all.
Updating i_size (and all other btrfs_inode fields) before updating the
inode item is done pretty much everywhere (examples:
__btrfs_prealloc_file_range, btrfs_finish_ordered_io, etc, etc).
So unless you can point exactly how it can become a problem, I'll
leave as it is.
>
> Basically I mean,
> ...
> trans = btrfs_start_transaction(root, 1);
> if (IS_ERR(trans)) {
> ret = PTR_ERR(trans);
> } else {
> inode->i_ctime = CURRENT_TIME;
> ...
> }
>
>> + } else {
>> + ret = btrfs_update_inode(trans, root, inode);
>> + if (ret)
>> + btrfs_end_transaction(trans, root);
>> + else
>> + ret = btrfs_end_transaction(trans,
>> + root);
>
> calling same end_transaction() for two times seems kind of weird for me,
> what about this?
It's called one time.
>
> ret2 = btrfs_end_transaction(trans, root);
> if (!ret)
> ret = ret2;
Doesn't change correctness at all, purely stylistic choice.
thanks
>
> But anyway, I'm okay with both.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -liubo
>
>> }
>> free_extent_map(em);
>> + if (ret < 0)
>> + break;
>>
>> cur_offset = last_byte;
>> if (cur_offset >= alloc_end) {
>> --
>> 2.1.3
>>
>> --
>> 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
> --
> 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
--
Filipe David Manana,
"Reasonable men adapt themselves to the world.
Unreasonable men adapt the world to themselves.
That's why all progress depends on unreasonable men."
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: add missing inode item update in fallocate()
2015-03-13 8:59 ` Filipe David Manana
@ 2015-03-13 9:02 ` Filipe David Manana
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Filipe David Manana @ 2015-03-13 9:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Liu Bo; +Cc: Filipe Manana, linux-btrfs
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 8:59 AM, Filipe David Manana <fdmanana@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 8:11 AM, Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 03:36:58PM +0000, Filipe Manana wrote:
>>> If we fallocate(), without the keep size flag, into an area already covered
>>> by an extent previously fallocated, we were updating the inode's i_size but
>>> we weren't updating the inode item in the fs/subvol tree. A following umount
>>> + mount would result in a loss of the inode's size (and an fsync would miss
>>> too the fact that the inode changed).
>>>
>>> Reproducer:
>>>
>>> $ mkfs.btrfs -f /dev/sdd
>>> $ mount /dev/sdd /mnt
>>> $ fallocate -n -l 1M /mnt/foobar
>>> $ fallocate -l 512K /mnt/foobar
>>> $ umount /mnt
>>> $ mount /dev/sdd /mnt
>>> $ od -t x1 /mnt/foobar
>>> 0000000
>>>
>>> The expected result is:
>>>
>>> $ od -t x1 /mnt/foobar
>>> 0000000 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
>>> *
>>> 2000000
>>>
>>> A test case for fstests follows soon.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
>>> ---
>>> fs/btrfs/file.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++-----
>>> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/file.c b/fs/btrfs/file.c
>>> index 8f256b1..fb4bd79 100644
>>> --- a/fs/btrfs/file.c
>>> +++ b/fs/btrfs/file.c
>>> @@ -2677,13 +2677,10 @@ static long btrfs_fallocate(struct file *file, int mode,
>>> 1 << inode->i_blkbits,
>>> offset + len,
>>> &alloc_hint);
>>> -
>>> - if (ret < 0) {
>>> - free_extent_map(em);
>>> - break;
>>> - }
>>> } else if (actual_end > inode->i_size &&
>>> !(mode & FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE)) {
>>> + struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans;
>>> +
>>> /*
>>> * We didn't need to allocate any more space, but we
>>> * still extended the size of the file so we need to
>>> @@ -2692,8 +2689,22 @@ static long btrfs_fallocate(struct file *file, int mode,
>>> inode->i_ctime = CURRENT_TIME;
>>> i_size_write(inode, actual_end);
>>> btrfs_ordered_update_i_size(inode, actual_end, NULL);
>>> + /* 1 unit for inode item */
>>> + trans = btrfs_start_transaction(root, 1);
>>> + if (IS_ERR(trans)) {
>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(trans);
>>
>> I prefer putting this earlier, before i_size updates, to
>> protect us from another isize inconsistence(disk_i_size, isize vs isize in inode_item).
>
> I don't think that's a problem at all.
> Updating i_size (and all other btrfs_inode fields) before updating the
> inode item is done pretty much everywhere (examples:
> __btrfs_prealloc_file_range, btrfs_finish_ordered_io, etc, etc).
So re-reading this, you meant starting the transaction before doing
the size update and not doing the inode item update before updating
the i_size. So that's ok for me.
>
> So unless you can point exactly how it can become a problem, I'll
> leave as it is.
>
>>
>> Basically I mean,
>> ...
>> trans = btrfs_start_transaction(root, 1);
>> if (IS_ERR(trans)) {
>> ret = PTR_ERR(trans);
>> } else {
>> inode->i_ctime = CURRENT_TIME;
>> ...
>> }
>>
>>> + } else {
>>> + ret = btrfs_update_inode(trans, root, inode);
>>> + if (ret)
>>> + btrfs_end_transaction(trans, root);
>>> + else
>>> + ret = btrfs_end_transaction(trans,
>>> + root);
>>
>> calling same end_transaction() for two times seems kind of weird for me,
>> what about this?
>
> It's called one time.
>
>>
>> ret2 = btrfs_end_transaction(trans, root);
>> if (!ret)
>> ret = ret2;
>
> Doesn't change correctness at all, purely stylistic choice.
>
> thanks
>
>>
>> But anyway, I'm okay with both.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> -liubo
>>
>>> }
>>> free_extent_map(em);
>>> + if (ret < 0)
>>> + break;
>>>
>>> cur_offset = last_byte;
>>> if (cur_offset >= alloc_end) {
>>> --
>>> 2.1.3
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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
>> --
>> 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
>
>
>
> --
> Filipe David Manana,
>
> "Reasonable men adapt themselves to the world.
> Unreasonable men adapt the world to themselves.
> That's why all progress depends on unreasonable men."
--
Filipe David Manana,
"Reasonable men adapt themselves to the world.
Unreasonable men adapt the world to themselves.
That's why all progress depends on unreasonable men."
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] Btrfs: add missing inode item update in fallocate()
2015-03-12 23:23 ` [PATCH v2] " Filipe Manana
@ 2015-03-14 16:41 ` Liu Bo
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Liu Bo @ 2015-03-14 16:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Filipe Manana; +Cc: linux-btrfs
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 11:23:13PM +0000, Filipe Manana wrote:
> If we fallocate(), without the keep size flag, into an area already covered
> by an extent previously fallocated, we were updating the inode's i_size but
> we weren't updating the inode item in the fs/subvol tree. A following umount
> + mount would result in a loss of the inode's size (and an fsync would miss
> too the fact that the inode changed).
>
> Reproducer:
>
> $ mkfs.btrfs -f /dev/sdd
> $ mount /dev/sdd /mnt
> $ fallocate -n -l 1M /mnt/foobar
> $ fallocate -l 512K /mnt/foobar
> $ umount /mnt
> $ mount /dev/sdd /mnt
> $ od -t x1 /mnt/foobar
> 0000000
>
> The expected result is:
>
> $ od -t x1 /mnt/foobar
> 0000000 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> *
> 2000000
>
> A test case for fstests follows soon.
Looks good.
Reviewed-by: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com>
>
> Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
> ---
>
> V2: Update the inode's sizes and ctime while holding a transaction
> open.
>
> fs/btrfs/file.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/file.c b/fs/btrfs/file.c
> index 8f256b1..c261ff0 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/file.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/file.c
> @@ -2677,23 +2677,34 @@ static long btrfs_fallocate(struct file *file, int mode,
> 1 << inode->i_blkbits,
> offset + len,
> &alloc_hint);
> -
> - if (ret < 0) {
> - free_extent_map(em);
> - break;
> - }
> } else if (actual_end > inode->i_size &&
> !(mode & FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE)) {
> + struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans;
> +
> /*
> * We didn't need to allocate any more space, but we
> * still extended the size of the file so we need to
> - * update i_size.
> + * update i_size and the inode item.
> */
> - inode->i_ctime = CURRENT_TIME;
> - i_size_write(inode, actual_end);
> - btrfs_ordered_update_i_size(inode, actual_end, NULL);
> + trans = btrfs_start_transaction(root, 1);
> + if (IS_ERR(trans)) {
> + ret = PTR_ERR(trans);
> + } else {
> + inode->i_ctime = CURRENT_TIME;
> + i_size_write(inode, actual_end);
> + btrfs_ordered_update_i_size(inode, actual_end,
> + NULL);
> + ret = btrfs_update_inode(trans, root, inode);
> + if (ret)
> + btrfs_end_transaction(trans, root);
> + else
> + ret = btrfs_end_transaction(trans,
> + root);
> + }
> }
> free_extent_map(em);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + break;
>
> cur_offset = last_byte;
> if (cur_offset >= alloc_end) {
> --
> 2.1.3
>
> --
> 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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-03-14 16:41 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2015-03-12 15:36 [PATCH] Btrfs: add missing inode item update in fallocate() Filipe Manana
2015-03-12 23:23 ` [PATCH v2] " Filipe Manana
2015-03-14 16:41 ` Liu Bo
2015-03-13 8:11 ` [PATCH] " Liu Bo
2015-03-13 8:59 ` Filipe David Manana
2015-03-13 9:02 ` Filipe David Manana
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.