Benjamin Siaka | 22 Sep 03:19 2014


Hello my Dear,

I will greatly appreciate my correspondence meets you in good health condition.

My name is Mr. Benjamin Siaka. I am seeking for your co-operation for investment partnership in your
Country. I shall provide the FUND for the investment. When you acknowledged the receipt of this
correspondence, thereafter I will give you the Full Details of my investment proposal.

I await your response in earliest.

My regards,
Mr. Benjamin Siaka.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe reiserfs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo <at>
More majordomo info at

doiggl | 19 Sep 09:50 2014

Do these reiser4 patches apply and work properly with the linux-3.16.x series ?

Do these reiser4 patches apply and work properly with the linux-3.16.x

- reiser4-for-3.15.2.patch
- 3.15.1-reiser4-basic-discard-support.patch

Just asking.

Cheers Glenn
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe reiserfs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo <at>
More majordomo info at

Ivan Shapovalov | 10 Sep 21:00 2014

reiser4 (ccreg40): very slow mount, poor unlink performance, questions about compression modes


The preamble: recently I had to force-change my configuration (the old laptop
was stolen). What I have now is a combination of a tiny 16 GiB SSD and a huge
1 TiB HDD.

...So I've placed my /home on HDD. Partition size is 800 GiB, formatting
options are "create=ccreg40,compress=gzip1,compressMode=latt" and I have a few

1. What is the recommended compression mode?
More specifically, what is the default "conv" mode? What is its purpose, why is
it the default?
I'm asking, because I wasn't able to understand its purpose from code, and the
code itself looks hackish in some places (hardcoded fallback to extent-only
files, hardcoded policy, hardcoded fallback to "latt" in many cases, etc).

2. The mount time of a 800-GiB partition is >20 seconds. And with
dont_load_bitmap it's around 1-2 seconds. Why so much? Why other filesystems
have drastically less mount times? If they have an equivalent of
dont_load_bitmap enabled by default, why don't we do it?

3. Given a directory tree with ~20k files of total size around 20 GiB,
its removal takes forever. From strace I see that a single unlink takes
~1 second. Again, why so much? Is it related to my choice of "latt" compression
mode over the default "conv"?

3a. I can reproduce the "directory not empty" bug :) Interestingly, it is
always the same directory under the aforementioned huge hierarchy. (I've
done the unpack-remove cycle a few times.)
(Continue reading)

Ivan Shapovalov | 8 Sep 20:43 2014

[RFC] [PATCHv2 0/3] reiser4: block deallocation fixes.

Actually, the idea of converting immediate allocations into deferred when
discard is enabled was flawed. Deferred deallocations ignore block stage
and additional flags, while some immediate deallocations use non-standard
stage/flags which do not match what's done by reiser4_post_write_back_hook().

While at it, I've removed specifications of block stage in deferred deallocations.
It is not used anyway. This is first commit.

Next commit does the following. Actually, most of the immediate deallocations
do not need to be considered for discarding: these are deallocations done in
error paths, and respective blocks are never written between their allocation
and deallocation. Two exceptions are deallocations in wandering log code. In these
cases, blocks are allocated, then written, then deallocated without BA_DEFER.
I've just made these deallocations explicitly deferred, which is OK because they
have a suitable block stage.

Last commit actually removes wrong code, again making immediate deallocations
always immediate.

Ivan Shapovalov (3):
  reiser4: deferred (BA_DEFER) deallocations do not make use of target stage.
  reiser4: mark final deallocations in wandering log code as deferred.
  reiser4: block_alloc: get rid of discard-related hack in reiser4_dealloc_blocks().

 fs/reiser4/block_alloc.c  |  9 +++++++--
 fs/reiser4/plugin/txmod.c | 15 +++++----------
 fs/reiser4/wander.c       |  6 +++---
 3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)


(Continue reading)

Husam Al Sayed | 3 Sep 20:46 2014

FROM: Husam Al Sayed.

FROM: Husam Al Sayed.

EMAIL:alsayedhusa <at>


I decided to write you this proposal in good faith, believing that you will
not betray me. I am Mr. Husam Al Sayed, a Bank officer here in U.A.E.

One Mr. Peter Adams, a citizen of your country and Crude Oil dealer made a fixed deposit with my bank in 2005
for 108 calendar months, valued at US$30,000,000.00 (Thirty Million United State Dollars) the due date
for this deposit contract was last 22nd of January 2014. Sadly Peter was among the death victims in the May
27 2006 Earthquake disaster in Java, Indonesia that killed over 5,000 people. He was in Indonesia on a
business trip and that was how he met his untimely end. My bank management is yet to know about his death, I
knew about it because he was my friend and I am his Account Officer. Peter did not mention any Next of Kin/
Heir when the account was opened, he was not married and no children. Last week my Bank Management
requested that Peter should give instructions on what to do 
 about his funds, if to renew the contract.

I know this will happen and that is why I have been looking for a means to handle the situation, because if my
Bank Directors happens to know that Peter is dead and do not have any Heir, they will take the funds for their
personal use, so I don't want such to happen. That is why I am seeking your co-operation to present you as the
Next of Kin/ Heir to the account, since you are a foreigner and my bank head quarters will release the
account to you. There is no risk involved; the transaction will be executed under a legitimate
arrangement that will protect us from any breach of law. It is better that we claim the money, than allowing
the Bank Directors to take it, they are rich already. I am not a greedy person, so I am suggesting we share the
funds in this ratio, 50/50%, equal sharing. Let 
 me know your mind on this and please do treat this information highly confidential. We shall go over the
details once I receive your urgent response. Please Urgently get back to me through this email address as
soon as possible:
(Continue reading)

doiggl | 3 Sep 04:24 2014

Will a reiser4 patch be made available for linux-3.16 as it has been released.

Will a reiser4 patch be made available for linux-3.16 as it has been

What patches will be included in this, is there a list of them ?
Cheers Glenn
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe reiserfs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo <at>
More majordomo info at

doiggl | 30 Aug 13:16 2014

Here is a plain kernel based on 3.15x with the reiser4 patch enabled.

Here is a plain kernel based on 3.15.x with the reiser4 patch built with
the Opensuse build service [obs] system.

The built rpms are here

 Architecture: i586


Repository has been published Architecture: x86_64


The project is here

The log of the build is here {x86_64} as an example. [Its a long buildlog]
(Continue reading)

Matt | 28 Aug 17:16 2014

linux-3.16.2 queue (3.16.1+)

Hi Greg,

please consider adding the following 2 patches to 3.16.2:

Jan Kara (1):
      reiserfs: Fix use after free in journal teardown

Jeff Mahoney (1):
      reiserfs: fix corruption introduced by balance_leaf refactor


Many thanks in advance

Kind Regards

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe reiserfs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo <at>
More majordomo info at

doiggl | 26 Aug 08:52 2014

What can I do next to use R4 partition sdb

What can I do next to use R4 partition  sdb 
Thanks Glenn

- What I have done so far:

# md /media/disk

# ls -la  /media/disk
total 0
drwxr-xr-x 2 root users 48 Aug 18 16:05 .
drwxr-xr-x 4 root root  96 Aug 19 18:21 ..

mount command used.
# strace mount /dev/sdb  /media/disk

# strace shows {last few lines}
stat("/sbin/mount.reiser4", 0x7fff82b08700) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or
stat("/sbin/fs.d/mount.reiser4", 0x7fff82b08700) = -1 ENOENT (No such file
or directory)
stat("/sbin/fs/mount.reiser4", 0x7fff82b08700) = -1 ENOENT (No such file
or directory)
mount("/dev/sdb", "/media/disk", "reiser4", MS_MGC_VAL, NULL) = -1 ENOENT
(No such file or directory)
lstat("/media/disk", {st_mode=S_IFDIR|0755, st_size=48, ...}) = 0
stat("/media/disk", {st_mode=S_IFDIR|0755, st_size=48, ...}) = 0
stat("/dev/sdb", {st_mode=S_IFBLK|0660, st_rdev=makedev(8, 16), ...}) = 0
write(2, "mount: ", 7mount: )                  = 7
write(2, "mount(2) failed", 15mount(2) failed)         = 15
(Continue reading)

bugzilla-daemon | 24 Aug 15:03 2014

[Bug 83121] New: silent data corruption

            Bug ID: 83121
           Summary: silent data corruption
           Product: File System
           Version: 2.5
    Kernel Version: 3.16.1
          Hardware: All
                OS: Linux
              Tree: Mainline
            Status: NEW
          Severity: high
          Priority: P1
         Component: ReiserFS
          Assignee: reiserfs-devel <at>
          Reporter: spike <at>
        Regression: No

In 3.16.1 kernel corrupt files in reiserfs filesystem. Data in changed files
truncated or have garbage at front. Filesystem is clean and reiserfsck found

kernel 3.16.0 working without data loss.
kernel 3.16.1 also working on SSD drive but corrupt data on hard drive.

Data corruption detected by gentoo portage system. /usr/portage live in
reiserfs partition and updated files have incorrect checksum.


You are receiving this mail because:
(Continue reading)

Edward Shishkin | 24 Aug 14:04 2014

[patch 1/1] reiser4: implement ->remount_fs() super operation

Hello everyone,

This patch prevents panic during reboot/shutdown caused by VFS changes 
in 3.15