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 <bo.li.liu@xxxxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
