Hello J. R., Thanks a lot for your work to improve hfsplus support in aufs. Concerning not supporting r/w hfsplus branches, I don't think it's a problem at all, and even, it's better not to support it. Indeed mounting hsplus partition in r/w mode on Linux is not advised because the partition journal is not supported yet, which is not safe.
I will definitely upgrade to you last version on monday. Also, I hope your latest version will be integrated into next Ubuntu 10.04, that would be great. Also I have another process freeze problem to report. Everything was working properly since applying your patch of March the 3rd, over the old version 20090126. But I have just encountered another process freeze again just now, which is different. This time, it follows a 'sys_write' system call. The hanged process is the 'bzr' version control utility I use here. The uninterruptible call still occurs in hfsplus_file_release function. FYI, please find the call trace attached. May be this problem does not exist anymore in your last version, so I will upgrade on monday, and inform whenever I come accross any other problem (I currently use aufs everyday). Kind regards Anand Le vendredi 05 mars 2010 à 07:05 +0900, [email protected] a écrit : > Ananda Tallur: > > I had to backport it to old version of aufs sources provided in Ubuntu > > karmic: 20090126. > > Hmm... That is about one year old version. Roughly speaking, I had > released the newer version 40 or 50 times since then. > > > > I would like to use the latest aufs source in the git standalone > > repository and I will try to do it soon. For this I will have to > ::: > > That is the most likely way, I believe. > > > > Please find attached the backported patch I have applied to aufs source > > version 20090126. There were also two small typo fixes: > > Ah, sorry. > Now I refined the patch and applied the similar approach to the internal > copy-up (several places), handling chmod/chown or any other attribute > changes, link(2) and rename(2). > The patch grew up and it will be included in next Monday release. While > I don't attach the latest patch to this mail, I'd suggest you to upgrade > aufs on next Monday. > > Here is a list which I've found about hfsplus. > These things never mean that hfsplus is bad. It just differs from other > popular linux filesystems. Additionally you are using it as RO. They > won't be problem on your system generally. > - hfsplus does not set limit to the link count in link(2). Potentially > or theoritically it can be a problem when the link count overflows (I > don't think it can happen easily though). > - it doesn't seem to be available to be remounted RO --> RW. > - it doesn't seem to handle the block count of a file which has a hole > in it (sparse file) and a symlink. Or its blockc count looks uncommon. > - it doesn't support splice(2) for write, and doesn't update atime for > splice read (or stat/fstat cannot get the updated atime). > - it may return a positive number as the link count of an unlinked file, > and its size became 0 (incorrect). > - sgid bit of the parent dir of a newly created file doesn't seem to be > inherited (sysv:bsd behaviour). > - finally, I gave up supporting writable hfsplus branch in aufs. > > > J. R. Okajima
[ 1801.570062] bzr D 00000000ffffffff 0 4502 3020 0x00000004 [ 1801.570067] ffff880152483b68 0000000000000082 0000000000015ac0 0000000000015ac0 [ 1801.570071] ffff8801783d5f80 ffff880152483fd8 0000000000015ac0 ffff8801783d5bc0 [ 1801.570074] 0000000000015ac0 ffff880152483fd8 0000000000015ac0 ffff8801783d5f80 [ 1801.570077] Call Trace: [ 1801.570086] [<ffffffff8104aa6b>] ? mutex_spin_on_owner+0x8b/0xb0 [ 1801.570091] [<ffffffff8155f8d7>] __mutex_lock_slowpath+0xe7/0x170 [ 1801.570095] [<ffffffff81133966>] ? kmem_cache_alloc+0x126/0x150 [ 1801.570098] [<ffffffff8155f7cb>] mutex_lock+0x2b/0x50 [ 1801.570108] [<ffffffffa0bf2a6f>] hfsplus_file_release+0x6f/0xb0 [hfsplus] [ 1801.570112] [<ffffffff811427e5>] __fput+0xf5/0x210 [ 1801.570115] [<ffffffff81142925>] fput+0x25/0x30 [ 1801.570124] [<ffffffffa0aef379>] au_hfput+0x19/0x40 [aufs] [ 1801.570130] [<ffffffffa0aef3ea>] au_set_h_fptr+0x4a/0x80 [aufs] [ 1801.570136] [<ffffffffa0aed182>] au_reopen_nondir+0xc2/0x130 [aufs] [ 1801.570142] [<ffffffffa0aed475>] au_ready_to_write+0x285/0x380 [aufs] [ 1801.570145] [<ffffffff81560b2b>] ? __down_read+0xbb/0xc6 [ 1801.570151] [<ffffffffa0aeedaf>] aufs_write+0x16f/0x2d0 [aufs] [ 1801.570155] [<ffffffff8110e6e2>] ? do_anonymous_page+0xc2/0x260 [ 1801.570159] [<ffffffff81039749>] ? default_spin_lock_flags+0x9/0x10 [ 1801.570163] [<ffffffff8124ec76>] ? security_file_permission+0x16/0x20 [ 1801.570166] [<ffffffff81140e58>] vfs_write+0xb8/0x1a0 [ 1801.570169] [<ffffffff81563924>] ? do_page_fault+0x194/0x370 [ 1801.570172] [<ffffffff81141911>] sys_write+0x51/0x90 [ 1801.570176] [<ffffffff810131f2>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
