ACK, of course.
thanks, Alex
Mingming Cao wrote:
On Thu, 2007-06-14 at 19:29 +0400, Dmitriy Monakhov wrote:
I just cant belive my eyes then i saw this at the first time...
simple test: strace dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/file
Thanks for reporting it.
open(/dev/zero, O_RDONLY) = 0
Mingming Cao wrote:
From the comments it says the page-private is set to 1 to letting
commit_write know that it needs block reservation, but I don't see the
page-private value being checked in ext4_wb_commit_write(). Instead,
the PageMappedToDisk(page) flag is being checked.
Alex, can you
On Jun 18, 2007 21:04 -0700, Avantika Mathur wrote:
Here is the uninitialized block group patch, rebased to the ext4 git
tree, after ext4_remove_subdirs_limit.patch.
Andreas, please let me know if there are any issues with the patch
+__le16 ext4_group_desc_csum(struct ext4_sb_info *sbi,
say, at mount time we fund transaction logged. this means part of it can be
on a disk. what do we do if transaction in the journal is found with wrong
checksum? leave partial transaction in-place?
thanks, Alex
Girish Shilamkar wrote:
Hi,
The journal checksums patches for ext4 and
Did anyone ever see this?
This is a relatively simple (and actually safe) change to make now, but
would be harder to do as ext4 becomes more widely used.
I think all that would be needed is that when accessing an extent with
ext_pblock() (ee_start | ee_start_hi) == 0 we return zeroes, just as if
On Jun 19, 2007 13:45 +0530, Girish Shilamkar wrote:
On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 12:03 +0400, Alex Tomas wrote:
say, at mount time we fund transaction logged. this means part of it can be
on a disk.
I am not sure I understand this completely. Still I hope the following
answers your question.
Andreas Dilger wrote:
I _think_ Alex is asking what happens if during a transaction undergoing
checkpoint of blocks to filesystem (not the last one in the journal) is
interrupted by a crash and upon restart the partially-checkpointed
transaction is found to have a checksum error?
yup, thanks
On 11:11 Втр 19 Июн , Alex Tomas wrote:
Mingming Cao wrote:
From the comments it says the page-private is set to 1 to letting
commit_write know that it needs block reservation, but I don't see the
page-private value being checked in ext4_wb_commit_write(). Instead,
the
Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
But whole approach based on using PagePrivate bit and page-private
ptr for special purposes is realy dengerous, and imho wrong,
because avery fs-related code assume that page-private points to
page_buffers. Especially this approach not work for blksize pgsize.
The best
Hi,
In block reservation code while rebalancing the free blocks why are we not
looking at the reservation slots that have no free blocks left. Rebalancing
the free blocks equally across all the reservation slots will make sure
we have less chances of failure later when we try to reserve
Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
Hi,
In block reservation code while rebalancing the free blocks why are we not
looking at the reservation slots that have no free blocks left. Rebalancing
the free blocks equally across all the reservation slots will make sure
we have less chances of failure later
On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 11:11 +0400, Alex Tomas wrote:
Mingming Cao wrote:
From the comments it says the page-private is set to 1 to letting
commit_write know that it needs block reservation, but I don't see the
page-private value being checked in ext4_wb_commit_write(). Instead,
the
Mingming Cao wrote:
O
BTW, can you point me your latest and greatest mballoc patch? I am
trying to forward port and merge that patch to ext4 patch queue
I am looking at the one found at.
ftp://ftp.clusterfs.com/pub/people/alex/2.6.19-rc6
-aneesh
-
To unsubscribe from this list:
Eric Sandeen wrote:
Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
Hi,
In block reservation code while rebalancing the free blocks why are we not
looking at the reservation slots that have no free blocks left. Rebalancing
the free blocks equally across all the reservation slots will make sure
we have less
Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
Eric Sandeen wrote:
Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
Hi,
In block reservation code while rebalancing the free blocks why are
we not looking at the reservation slots that have no free blocks
left. Rebalancing
the free blocks equally across all the reservation slots will
On Jun 19, 2007 13:10 +0400, Alex Tomas wrote:
Andreas Dilger wrote:
I _think_ Alex is asking what happens if during a transaction undergoing
checkpoint of blocks to filesystem (not the last one in the journal) is
interrupted by a crash and upon restart the partially-checkpointed
transaction
16 matches
Mail list logo
