On Wed, 06 Sep 2006 20:04:27 -0700
Badari Pulavarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been unable to reproduce this crash, btw. Is there some magic
incantation apat from running `fsx-linux'?
All I do is on a single 1k filesystem, run 4 copies of fsx (on 4
different files, ofcourse).
I
On Wed, 06 Sep 2006 10:39:06 -0700
Badari Pulavarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Andrew,
Its been reported that ext3_getblk() is not doing the right thing
and triggering following WARN():
BUG: warning at fs/ext3/inode.c:1016/ext3_getblk()
c01c5140 ext3_getblk+0x98/0x2a6 c03b2806
On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 21:54:30 +0200
Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 29 September 2006 21:18, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
gad, there have been so many all-CPU-backtrace patches over the years.
optimistically cc's Ingo
Ingo, do
On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 23:53:05 -0600
Andreas Dilger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 05, 2006 21:54 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 20:55:26 -0700 Andrew Morton wrote:
If you then mount this filesystem with `-t ext4dev -o extents', it becomes
incompatible with the ext3 driver
On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 23:58:29 -0600
Andreas Dilger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
but the patches have not been changed for ext4 (which should really
default to using extents on a filesystem with the INCOMPAT_EXTENT feature
set unless told otherwise). That is a necessity for filesystems larger
than
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 13:24:02 +0530
Suparna Bhattacharya [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 11:29:27PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 17:39:33 -0700
Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Could we please have a few nice words about ext4 for the record
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 17:07:18 -0400
Theodore Tso [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 01:48:18PM -0500, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
On Sat, 2006-10-07 at 13:20 -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
On Sat, Oct 07, 2006 at 10:53:47AM -0500, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
I noticed we are missing
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 08:02:14 -0700
Badari Pulavarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2006-10-10 at 21:01 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
Andrew Morton wrote:
ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.19-rc1/2.6.19-rc1-mm1/
- Added the ext4 filesystem
Why is ext3 slow??
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 09:47:17 -0500
From: Bill Rugolsky Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Arne Schmitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: ICP, 3ware, Areca?
On Tue, Nov 07, 2006 at 03:25:04PM +0100, Arne Schmitz wrote:
Has anyone
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 08:54:18 -0800
From: Jayachandran C. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Errors reported by Coverity in ext3.
[Re-sending to the ext3 list, with minor edits]
I'm in the process of fixing errors generated by the
On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 07:57:45 -0800
Badari Pulavarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We are looking at a customer situation (on 2.6.16-based distro) - where
system becomes almost useless while running some java stress tests.
Root cause seems to be taking a pagefault in generic_file_buffered_write
On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 00:49:20 -0800
Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2006-11-15 at 23:22 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 22:55:43 -0800
Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hmm, maxblocks, in bitmap_search_next_usable_block(), is the end block
number
On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 12:15:16 -0800
Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2006-11-16 at 01:13 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 00:49:20 -0800
Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2006-11-15 at 23:22 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 22
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 13:04:53 -0800
Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks, I have acked most of them, and will port them to ext3/4 soon.
You've acked #2 and #3. #4, #5 and #6 remain un-commented-upon and #1 is
unclear?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-ext4
On Tue, 19 Dec 2006 17:58:12 -0800
Suzuki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Fix the kmalloc flags used from within ext3, when we have an active journal
handle
If we do a kmalloc with GFP_KERNEL on system running low on memory,
with an active journal handle, we might end up in cleaning up
On Fri, 22 Dec 2006 23:25:16 +0300
Alex Tomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Once this code is settled in we should consider removal of the existing
reservations code from ext4.
+
+struct ext4_reservation_slot {
+ __u64 rs_reserved;
+ spinlock_t rs_lock;
+}
On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 18:32:07 -0500
Theodore Tso [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 02:42:51PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
I think ext3 is terminally crap by now. It still uses buffer heads in
places where it really really shouldn't, and as a result, things like
directory
On Sun, 7 Jan 2007 09:55:26 +0100
Willy Tarreau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 09:39:42PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Sat, 6 Jan 2007, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
During extremely high load, it appears that what slows kernel.org down
more
than anything else
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 16:44:39 +0800
From: Fengguang Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: LKML linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [BUG -mm] ext3_orphan_add() accessing corrupted list on a corrupted
ext3fs
I accidentally ran two qemu instances on the same ext3 fs, after that
On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 21:05:20 +0900
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Move the blocks on the temporary inode to the original inode
by a page.
1. Read the file data from the old blocks to the page
2. Move the block on the temporary inode to the original inode
3. Write the file data on the page into the
On Mon, 5 Feb 2007 14:12:04 +0100
Jan Kara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Move the blocks on the temporary inode to the original inode
by a page.
1. Read the file data from the old blocks to the page
2. Move the block on the temporary inode to the original inode
3. Write the file data on the
On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 11:33:46 +0300
Dmitriy Monakhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Almost all read/write operation handles data with chunks(segments or pages)
and result has integral behaviour for folowing scenario:
for_each_chunk() {
res = op();
if(IS_ERROR(res))
return
On Wed, 7 Feb 2007 13:46:57 -0700
Andreas Dilger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Feb 06, 2007 17:35 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Mon, 5 Feb 2007 14:12:04 +0100
Jan Kara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Move the blocks on the temporary inode to the original inode
by a page.
1. Read
On Thu, 8 Feb 2007 10:29:45 +0100 Jan Kara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed 07-02-07 12:56:59, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Wed, 7 Feb 2007 13:46:57 -0700
Andreas Dilger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Feb 06, 2007 17:35 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Mon, 5 Feb 2007 14:12:04 +0100
Jan
On Thu, 8 Feb 2007 11:21:02 +0100 Jan Kara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu 08-02-07 01:45:29, Andrew Morton wrote:
snip
I though Andreas meant any write changes - i.e. you check that noone
has open file descriptor for writing and block any new open for writing.
That can be done
This:
ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/tytso/ext4-patches/2.6.20-ext4-1/broken-out/i_version_2_ext4_specific_code
has 100% broken whitespace: it uses spaces where there should be hard tabs.
Please let's not merge anything which does that.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the
Sorry, we're seriously, seriously, seriously short on flags in the page
struct and this patch is going to need one heck of a good case for it to be
acceptable.
Even then, we should put a lot of effort into finding some way of avoiding
adding that page flag. One option might be to add a new
ia64 allmodconfig gives:
fs/stat.c: In function `cp_new_stat':
fs/stat.c:234: error: structure has no member named `st_i_version'
I'll drop the ext4 tree.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-ext4 in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at
On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 20:30:43 +0300 Alex Tomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Eric Sandeen (ES) writes:
ES Andrew Morton wrote:
Sorry, we're seriously, seriously, seriously short on flags in the page
struct and this patch is going to need one heck of a good case for it to
be
acceptable
On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 00:07:55 +0300
Alex Tomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew Morton (AM) writes:
AM If the page doesn't have buffer-heads, set PG_private and clear
page-private
AM If the page does have buffer_heads, use BH_Delay.
I did exactly this way in the first version
I have a report from a google person who just did some basic
power-it-off-during-a-write testing on 2.6.20's ext3. ordered-data is OK,
but data=journal came back with crap in the file data.
Is anyone doing any formal recovery stress-testing?
I suspect we should resurrect and formalise my old
On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 10:30:39 +0300 Alex Tomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew Morton (AM) writes:
- get_block(with BH_Delay) can be used to signal
filesystem that no actual allocation is required.
so, aware filesystem can just reserve space. then
- writepages() should walk through
On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 10:56:55 +0300 Alex Tomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew Morton (AM) writes:
AM Well, one could just assume that the page has no disk mapping and go and
AM make the space reservation. Things will work out OK when we come to do
AM writepage().
AM Or one could do
On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 14:50:22 -0800
Randy Dunlap [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 20:44:45 -0800 Andrew Morton wrote:
I have a report from a google person who just did some basic
power-it-off-during-a-write testing on 2.6.20's ext3. ordered-data is OK,
but data=journal
On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 16:31:09 -0700
Andreas Dilger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I suspect we should resurrect and formalise my old
make-the-disk-stop-accepting-writes-when-a-timer-goes-off thing. It was
very useful for stress-testing recovery.
We have a patch that we use for Lustre testing
On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 10:52:42 +1100 Rusty Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
This happened on 2.6.20-rc6-mm3, so I upgraded to 2.6.20-git14, and
same thing happened. Doing a forced fsck on the (corrupted by
double-mounting I think) filesystem fixed it, but I took a copy before
On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 15:16:58 +0530 Amit K. Arora [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(1) The final interface is yet to be decided. We have the option of
chosing from one of these:
a modifying posix_fallocate() in glibc
b using fcntl
c using ftruncate, or
d using the ioctl
On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 00:04:45 +0530
Amit K. Arora [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is to give a heads up on few patches that we will be soon coming up
with. These patches implement a new system call sys_fallocate() and a
new inode operation fallocate, for persistent preallocation. The new
system
On Thu, 01 Mar 2007 22:44:16 +
Dave Kleikamp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 14:25 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 00:04:45 +0530
Amit K. Arora [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+asmlinkage long sys_fallocate(int fd, loff_t offset, loff_t len)
+{
+ struct
On Thu, 01 Mar 2007 22:03:55 -0800 Badari Pulavarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just curious .. What does posix_fallocate() return ?
bookmark this:
http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/nfindex.html
Upon successful completion, posix_fallocate() shall return zero;
otherwise, an
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 18:35:54 +0100
From: Jan De Luyck [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: EXT3-fs warning (device sdd2): dx_probe: Unrecognised inode hash code
232
Hello,
Running 2.6.19.1 on AMD64.
While copying some files on an ext3
On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 15:54:10 -0800 Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There are race issues around ext[34] xattr block release code.
ext[34]_xattr_release_block() checks the reference count of xattr block
(h_refcount) and frees that xattr block if it is the last one reference
it. Unlike
On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 15:54:00 +0200 Valerie Clement [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Running benchmark tests (FFSB) on an ext4 filesystem, I noticed a
performance degradation (about 15-20 percent) in sequential write tests
between 2.6.19-rc6 and 2.6.21-rc4 kernels.
I ran the same tests on ext3
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 12:38:55 +0200 Jan Kara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
attached is a second version of a patch that stores inode flags such as
S_IMMUTABLE, S_APPEND, etc. from i_flags to EXT3_I(inode)-i_flags when
inode is written to disk. The same thing is done on GETFLAGS ioctl.
Quota
On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 11:41:14 +0400
Pavel Emelianov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If the thread failed to create the subsequent wait_event
will hang forever.
This is likely to happen if kernel hits max_threads limit.
Will be critical for virtualization systems that limit the
number of tasks
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 09:59:27 +0200 Mike Galbraith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Greetings,
As subject states, my GUI is going away for extended periods of time
when my very full and likely highly fragmented (how to find out)
filesystem is under heavy write load. While write is under way, if
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 13:31:30 -0600
Andreas Dilger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Apr 27, 2007 08:30 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On a good filesystem, when you do fsync() on a file, nothing at all
happens to any other files. On ext3, it seems to sync the global journal,
which means that
On Thu, 03 May 2007 21:38:10 +0400
Alex Tomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew Morton wrote:
We can make great improvements here, and I've (twice) previously decribed
how: hoist the entire ordered-mode data handling out of ext3, and out of
the buffer_head layer and move it up into the VFS
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 23:33:32 +0530 Amit K. Arora [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This patch implements the fallocate() system call and adds support for
i386, x86_64 and powerpc.
...
+asmlinkage long sys_fallocate(int fd, int mode, loff_t offset, loff_t len)
Please add a comment over this
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 23:41:01 +0530 Amit K. Arora [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+unsigned int ext4_ext_check_overlap(struct inode *inode,
+ struct ext4_extent *newext,
+ struct ext4_ext_path *path)
+{
+ unsigned long b1,
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 23:46:23 +0530 Amit K. Arora [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This patch adds write support for preallocated (using fallocate system
call) blocks/extents. The preallocated extents in ext4 are marked
uninitialized, hence they need special handling especially while
writing to them.
On Thu, 3 May 2007 21:29:55 -0700 Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+ ret = -EFBIG;
+ if (offset + len inode-i_sb-s_maxbytes)
+ goto out_fput;
This code does handle offset+len going negative, but only by accident, I
suspect.
But it doesn't handle offset+len wrapping
On Fri, 04 May 2007 10:18:12 +0400 Alex Tomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew Morton wrote:
Yes, there can be issues with needing to allocate journal space within the
context of a commit. But
no-no, this isn't required. we only need to mark pages/blocks within
transaction, otherwise
On Fri, 04 May 2007 10:57:12 +0400 Alex Tomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew Morton wrote:
On Fri, 04 May 2007 10:18:12 +0400 Alex Tomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew Morton wrote:
Yes, there can be issues with needing to allocate journal space within the
context of a commit
On Fri, 04 May 2007 11:39:22 +0400 Alex Tomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew Morton wrote:
I'm still not understanding. The terms you're using are a bit ambiguous.
What does find some dirty unallocated blocks mean? Find a page which is
dirty and which does not have a disk mapping
On Fri, 04 May 2007 18:20:51 +0200 Michal Piotrowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I ran this script tree times,
#! /bin/sh
for i in `find /sys/ -type f`
do
echo wyświetlam $i
sudo cat $i /dev/null
done
First run - scheduler bug
Second run - NOHZ bug
Third - VFS bug
On Fri, 4 May 2007 13:14:35 +0300 (EEST)
Pekka J Enberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As explained by Christoph Lameter, ext3_alloc_inode() touches the same
cache line as init_once() so we gain nothing from using slab
constructors. The SLUB allocator will be more effective without it
(free
On Sat, 5 May 2007 11:58:45 +0300 (EEST) Pekka J Enberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Fri, 4 May 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
I got 100% rejects against this because Christoph has already had
his paws all over the slab constructor code everywhere.
Was going to fix it up but then decided
On Mon, 7 May 2007 00:26:26 +0200 Frank van Maarseveen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
2.6.20.6, FC4:
I created a 91248k ext3 fs with 4k blocksize:
| mke2fs -j -b 4096 /dev/vol1/project
| mke2fs 1.38 (30-Jun-2005)
| Filesystem label=
| OS type: Linux
| Block size=4096 (log=2)
| Fragment
On Mon, 7 May 2007 05:37:54 -0600
Andreas Dilger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+ block = offset blkbits;
+ max_blocks = (EXT4_BLOCK_ALIGN(len + offset, blkbits) blkbits)
+ - block;
+ mutex_lock(EXT4_I(inode)-truncate_mutex);
+ credits =
On Mon, 7 May 2007 15:21:04 -0700
Andreas Dilger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On May 07, 2007 13:58 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
Final point: it's fairly disappointing that the present implementation is
ext4-only, and extent-only. I do think we should be aiming at an ext4
bitmap-based
On Mon, 07 May 2007 17:00:24 -0700
Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+ while (ret = 0 ret max_blocks) {
+ block = block + ret;
+ max_blocks = max_blocks - ret;
+ ret = ext4_ext_get_blocks(handle, inode, block,
+
On Thu, 17 May 2007 19:41:15 +0530 Amit K. Arora [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
fallocate() is a new system call being proposed here which will allow
applications to preallocate space to any file(s) in a file system.
I merged the first three patches into -mm, thanks.
All the system call numbers got
On Sat, 19 May 2007 20:30:31 +0800 Fengguang Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 11:28:24PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Thu, 17 May 2007 06:47:53 +0800 Fengguang Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Introduce a new page flag: PG_readahead.
Is there any way in which we can
Ted is dir_index maintainer ;)
That's a nice-looking bug report, btw. Thanks.
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2007 13:01:07 +0900
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: ext3 dir_index causes an error
Hello,
First of all, I
On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 09:18:55 +0400 Vasily Averin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Customers claims to ext3-related errors, investigation showed that ext3
orphan list has been corrupted and have the reference to non-ext3 inode. The
following debug helps to understand the reasons of this issue.
On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 17:57:14 +0200 Eric Sesterhenn / Snakebyte [EMAIL
PROTECTED] wrote:
hi,
i got the following BUG while running the syscalls.sh
from ltp-full-20070531 on an ext3 partition, it is easily reproducible
for me
[ 476.338068] [ cut here ]
[
someone ort to fix this
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2007 17:50:35 -0700 (PDT)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Bugme-new] [Bug 8643] New: Bug with negative timestamps on 64bit
machines
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8643
Summary:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 17:08:24 -0500 Eric Sandeen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Use zero_user_page() in cifs, ocfs2, ext4, and gfs2 where possible.
One patch, splattered across four maintainers, each of whom maintain separate
trees.
Sigh. Please, don't. _someone_ has to split this up, and it might
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 18:58:10 +0530 Amit K. Arora [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
N O T E:
---
1) Only Patches 4/7 and 7/7 are NEW. Rest of them are _already_ part
of ext4 patch queue git tree hosted by Ted.
Why the heck are replacements for these things being sent out again when
they're
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 23:27:57 +0530 Amit K. Arora [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please drop the non-ext4 patches from the ext4 tree and send incremental
patches against the (non-ext4) fallocate patches in -mm.
Please let us know what you think of Mingming's suggestion of posting
all the
Guys, Mike and Sreenivasa at google are looking into implementing
fallocate() on ext2. Of course, any such implementation could and should
also be portable to ext3 and ext4 bitmapped files.
I believe that Sreenivasa will mainly be doing the implementation work.
The basic plan is as follows:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 16:55:25 -0400
Theodore Tso [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 01:01:20PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
Guys, Mike and Sreenivasa at google are looking into implementing
fallocate() on ext2. Of course, any such implementation could and should
also
On Mon, 2 Jul 2007 00:11:11 +0200
Borislav Petkov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
---
From: Borislav Petkov [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fix error handling in ext3_create_journal according to kernel conventions.
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Index:
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:35:48 -0400
Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Add a mount option to turn off extents.
Please update the changelog to describe the reason for making this change.
Signed-off-by: Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
Index: linux-2.6.22-rc4/fs/ext4/super.c
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:36:01 -0400
Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Turn on extents feature by default in ext4 filesystem. User could use
-o noextents to turn it off.
Oh, there you go.
Index: linux-2.6.22-rc4/fs/ext4/super.c
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:36:12 -0400
Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Propagate flags such as S_APPEND, S_IMMUTABLE, etc. from i_flags into
ext4-specific i_flags. Hence, when someone sets these flags via a different
interface than ioctl, they are stored correctly.
This changelog is
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:36:48 -0400
Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 07, 2007 23:45 -0500, Jose R. Santos wrote:
The jbd2-debug file used to be located in /proc/sys/fs/jbd2-debug, but
create_proc_entry() does not do lookups on file names with more that one
directory deep.
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:36:56 -0400
Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This patch is a spinoff of the old nanosecond patches.
I don't know what the old nanosecond patches are. A link to a suitable
changlog for those patches would do in a pinch. Preferable would be to
write a proper
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:37:04 -0400
Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This patch converts the 32-bit i_version in the generic inode to a 64-bit
i_version field.
That's obvious from the patch. But what was the reason for making this
(unrelated to ext4) change?
Please update the changelog
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:37:16 -0400
Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This patch adds a 32-bit i_version_hi field to ext4_inode, which can be used
for 64-bit inode versions. This field will store the higher 32 bits of the
version, while Jean Noel's patch has added support to store the
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:36:22 -0400
Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
with the patch all headers are checked. the code should become
more resistant to on-disk corruptions. needless BUG_ON() have
been removed. please, review for inclusion.
...
@@ -269,6 +239,70 @@
return size;
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:37:36 -0400
Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This patch adds 64-bit inode version support to ext4. The lower 32 bits
are stored in the osd1.linux1.l_i_version field while the high 32 bits
are stored in the i_version_hi field newly created in the ext4_inode.
So
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:37:45 -0400
Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This patch is on top of i_version_update_vfs.
The i_version field of the inode is set on inode creation and incremented when
the inode is being modified.
Again, I don't think I've ever seen this patch before. It is at
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:38:01 -0400
Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This patch is on top of the nanosecond timestamp and i_version_hi
patches.
This sort of information isn't needed (or desired) when this patch hits the
git tree. Please ensure that things like this are cleaned up before
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 15:15:57 -0700
Badari Pulavarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, I looked at the problem now and here is the fix :)
whee, thanks.
Greg, Please consider this for stable release also.
No, it is only relevant to -mm's ext2-reservations.patch.
-
To unsubscribe from this list:
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:38:10 -0400 Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[PATCH] jbd2 stats through procfs
The patch below updates the jbd stats patch to 2.6.20/jbd2.
The initial patch was posted by Alex Tomas in December 2005
(http://marc.info/?l=linux-ext4m=113538565128617w=2).
It
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 22:09:08 -0400 Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David Chinneer pointed that we need to journal the version number
updates together with the operations that causes the change of the inode
version number, in order to survive server crashes so clients won't see
the
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 15:05:27 +1000 Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It just occurred to me:
If i_version is 64bit, then knfsd would need to be careful when
reading it on a 32bit host. What are the locking rules?
Presumably it is only updated under i_mutex protection, but having
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:38:18 -0400 Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu May 17 17:21:08 2007
Hi,
I have rebased this patch to 2.6.22-rc1 so that it can be added to the
ext4 patch queue. It has been tested by creating more than 65000 subdirs
and then deleting
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:38:51 -0400 Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Subject: [EXT4 set 9][PATCH 4/5]Morecleanups:ext4_extent_compilation_fixes
Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:38:51 -0400
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Organization: IBM Linux Technology Center
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.0
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:38:59 -0400 Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Dmitry Monakhov [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: ext4: extent macros cleanup
- Replace math equation to it's macro equivalent
s/it's/its/;)
- make ext4_ext_grow_indepth() indexes/leaf correct
hm, what was wrong with
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 23:18:50 -0400 Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 22:17 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 22:09:08 -0400 Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David Chinneer pointed that we need to journal the version number
updates together
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 07:01:08 -0600 Andreas Dilger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- /* AKPM: buglet - add `i' to tmp! */
Damn. After, what, seven years, someone actually fixed it?
for (i = 0; i bh-b_size; i += 512) {
- journal_header_t *tmp =
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 06:10:56 -0600 Andreas Dilger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 10, 2007 16:32 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
err = ext4_reserve_inode_write(handle, inode, iloc);
+ if (EXT4_I(inode)-i_extra_isize
+ EXT4_SB(inode-i_sb)-s_want_extra_isize
+ !(EXT4_I(inode
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 08:57:51 -0500 Dave Kleikamp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 12:38 +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
Andrew Morton wrote:
+if (ext4_ext_check_header(inode,
ext_block_hdr(bh
On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 16:00:48 +0530 Kalpak Shah [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- if (inode-i_nlink = EXT4_LINK_MAX)
+ if (EXT4_DIR_LINK_MAX(inode))
return -EMLINK;
argh. WHY_IS_EXT4_FULL_OF_UPPER_CASE_MACROS_WHICH_COULD_BE_IMPLEMENTED
as_lower_case_inlines? Sigh. It's
On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 15:02:23 +0200 Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 14:47 -0700, Zach Brown wrote:
Peter, do you have any interest in seeing how far we can get
at tracking lock_page()? I'm not holding my breath, but any little bit
would probably help.
On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 21:21:03 +0200 Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shows the current stacktrace where we violate the previously established
locking order.
yup, but the lock_page() which we did inside truncate_mutex was a
lock_page() against a different address_space: the blockdev
On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 22:00:03 +0200
Jörn Engel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 9 July 2007 22:01:48 +0400, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
Yes. Note that ext2_clear_inode() is referenced from ext2_sops, so even
empty, it leaves traces in resulting kernel.
Is that your opinion or have you
1 - 100 of 152 matches
Mail list logo
