At 10/25/2016 01:46 AM, David Sterba wrote:
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 10:03:39AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Qu Wenruo (4):
btrfs: delayed-ref: Add support for increasing data ref under spinlock
btrfs: dedupe: Inband in-memory only de-duplication implement
btrfs: relocation: Enhance error handling to avoid BUG_ON
btrfs: dedupe: Introduce new reconfigure ioctl
Wang Xiaoguang (10):
btrfs: dedupe: Introduce dedupe framework and its header
btrfs: dedupe: Introduce function to initialize dedupe info
btrfs: dedupe: Introduce function to add hash into in-memory tree
btrfs: dedupe: Introduce function to remove hash from in-memory tree
btrfs: dedupe: Introduce function to search for an existing hash
btrfs: dedupe: Implement btrfs_dedupe_calc_hash interface
btrfs: ordered-extent: Add support for dedupe
btrfs: dedupe: Add ioctl for inband dedupelication
btrfs: improve inode's outstanding_extents computation
I've noticed that this patch is different from what Wang sent
independently. Is the patch necessary for the dedupe patchset? If not,
please drop it.
Yes, Wang is still working the ENOSPC fix, which doesn't only affect
dedupe, but also compression.
The merge conflict is in the checks for free space inode,
if (root == root->fs_info->tree_root)
vs
if (!btrfs_is_free_space_inode(...))
If you need the patch, then please update it to the latest version. I
won't get the merge conflicts at least, this is acceptable for the
testing 'for-next' branch.
I'll re-order the patches, maybe put his ENOSPC fixes at the end or
beginning.
Since Wang hopes to fix ENOSPC for both compression and dedupe, the
patchset rebase will be blocked for several days.
Thanks,
Qu
--
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
