Talk:Status

From btrfs Wiki
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(parity not checksummed removed)
(Degraded mount fixes in 4.14: new section)
Line 3: Line 3:
  
 
: We had some discussions how to move forward with raid56, the parity checksum was found to be not necessary so I removed it from the list as a problem to fix. --[[User:Kdave|Kdave]] ([[User talk:Kdave|talk]]) 21:26, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 
: We had some discussions how to move forward with raid56, the parity checksum was found to be not necessary so I removed it from the list as a problem to fix. --[[User:Kdave|Kdave]] ([[User talk:Kdave|talk]]) 21:26, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 +
 +
== Degraded mount fixes in 4.14 ==
 +
 +
The page mentions an issue with degraded mounts where you can get stuck in irreversible read-only mode. If I am not mistaken, the issue has been fixed by the commits 21634a19 & 4330e183 which have been included in the 4.14 kernel. Isn't this the case?

Revision as of 01:08, 16 November 2018

parity not checksummed removed

On Feb 27, kdave removed the "parity not checksummed" note for RAID56. Was this change made in Kernel 4.16? I don't see the word parity in Dave's pull request for that kernel. Is this just hiding in there under a different name? Or was it fixed earlier? Thanks Bobpaul (talk) 20:05, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

We had some discussions how to move forward with raid56, the parity checksum was found to be not necessary so I removed it from the list as a problem to fix. --Kdave (talk) 21:26, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Degraded mount fixes in 4.14

The page mentions an issue with degraded mounts where you can get stuck in irreversible read-only mode. If I am not mistaken, the issue has been fixed by the commits 21634a19 & 4330e183 which have been included in the 4.14 kernel. Isn't this the case?

Personal tools