Plans for BTRFS in Fedora

Peter Robinson pbrobinson at
Fri Feb 25 13:52:17 UTC 2011

On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 1:31 PM, Ric Wheeler <rwheeler at> wrote:
> On 02/25/2011 04:06 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 7:54 PM, Ric Wheeler<rwheeler at>  wrote:
>>> On 02/24/2011 08:44 AM, Matej Cepl wrote:
>>>> Dne 23.2.2011 20:49, Matthew Garrett napsal(a):
>>>>> btrfs does the former without anywhere near as much of the latter.
>>>> BTRFS so far only makes my kernel panicking as it did anytime I have
>>>> been trying it since Fedora 9 (yes, I am crazy). This is absolutely not
>>>> meant as anything personal against Josef (I know very well how
>>>> incredibly small group are BTRFS developers), but just a bit of
>>>> suspicion, whether "we have fsck now (or we will have fsck soon)" really
>>>> leads so quickly "let's make it default".
>>>> I am quite OK with having crashing and unstable systemd or Gnome 3 (and
>>>> again, nothing against their developers, this is Rawhide and Fedora, so
>>>> when my kids are alive despite me using it I am pretty happy), but
>>>> unstable file system is quite a different matter.
>>>> Could we slow down a bit, please?
>>>> Matěj
>>> Can we have pointers to these crashes or BZ reports please? As Josef has
>>> noted,
>>> btrfs has been quite stable in our testing and we are certainly going to
>>> pursue
>>> any reports.
>>> Also note that the btrfs community of developers is not so small these
>>> days and
>>> rivals (if not surpasses) the size of the team working on ext4.
>>> Just to answer your last question,  we do not intend to "slow it down".
>>>  Rather,
>>> we hope to speed it up considerably by adding developers, testing and
>>> users :)
>> I've seen a number of crashes using 2.6.37 on a Dell 6410 using btrfs
>> in a luks encrypted LVM volume. Sometimes its a message in dmesg,
>> other times an out right crash. Each time it happens I submit the
>> kernel oops using abrt, but unlike RHBZ reports you don't get a URL
>> for the report so I have no idea where they get reported to but it
>> might be worthwhile reviewing that information where ever it ends up.
>> Peter
> I think that it is probably best to report issues to the linux-btrfs list
> where the developers are. If you report them via bugzilla, we will see them
> directly there as well.
> Seems that we need to figure out where these abrt generated BZ's go, I have
> not seen them come in via our normal bugzilla reports but might need to
> figure out how to do specific queries for them.

I think the kernel ones get submitted here but
if not you'd have to look closer at the abrt-addon-kerneloops for
details on where its sent.


More information about the devel mailing list