Hi, this is the latest set of gfs patches, it includes some minor munging
since the previous set. Andrew, could this be added to -mm? there's not
much in the way of pending changes.
http://redhat.com/~teigland/gfs2/20050901/gfs2-full.patch
http://redhat.com/~teigland/gfs2/20050901/broken-out
On Thu, 2005-09-01 at 18:46 +0800, David Teigland wrote:
Hi, this is the latest set of gfs patches, it includes some minor munging
since the previous set. Andrew, could this be added to -mm? there's not
much in the way of pending changes.
can you post them here instead so that they can be
David Teigland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi, this is the latest set of gfs patches, it includes some minor munging
since the previous set. Andrew, could this be added to -mm?
Dumb question: why?
Maybe I was asleep, but I don't recall seeing much discussion or exposition
of
- Why the kernel
On Thu, 2005-09-01 at 18:46 +0800, David Teigland wrote:
Hi, this is the latest set of gfs patches, it includes some minor munging
since the previous set. Andrew, could this be added to -mm? there's not
much in the way of pending changes.
http://redhat.com/~teigland/gfs2/20050901/gfs2
There are a variety of mount options, tunable parameters, internal
statistics, and methods of online file system manipulation.
Signed-off-by: Ken Preslan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: David Teigland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/gfs2/ioctl.c | 1485
The lock_dlm module uses the DLM in linux/drivers/dlm/ for inter-node
locking.
Signed-off-by: Ken Preslan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: David Teigland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/gfs2/locking/dlm/Makefile |3
fs/gfs2/locking/dlm/lock.c | 533
Code that deals with quotas.
Signed-off-by: Ken Preslan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: David Teigland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/gfs2/lvb.c | 61 ++
fs/gfs2/lvb.h | 28 +
fs/gfs2/quota.c | 1209
fs/gfs2/quota.h | 34 +
4 files
A per-node on-disk log is used for recovery.
Signed-off-by: Ken Preslan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: David Teigland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/gfs2/log.c | 670 +
fs/gfs2/log.h | 68 +
fs/gfs2/recovery.c | 561
Code that handles extended attributes and ACL's.
Signed-off-by: Ken Preslan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: David Teigland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/gfs2/acl.c | 313 ++
fs/gfs2/acl.h | 37 +
fs/gfs2/eaops.c | 179 ++
fs/gfs2/eaops.h | 30 +
fs/gfs2/eattr.c | 1621
Add gfs to the build system and gfs2.txt to Documentation.
Signed-off-by: Ken Preslan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: David Teigland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
Documentation/filesystems/gfs2.txt | 194 +
fs/Kconfig | 15 ++
fs/Makefile
The lock_nolock module does no inter-node locking and allows gfs to be
used as a local file system.
Signed-off-by: Ken Preslan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: David Teigland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/gfs2/locking/nolock/Makefile |3
fs/gfs2/locking/nolock/main.c | 267
The lock_harness module allows a gfs file system to connect to a given
lock module.
Signed-off-by: Ken Preslan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: David Teigland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/gfs2/locking/harness/Makefile |3
fs/gfs2/locking/harness/lm_interface.h | 286
Central header files that are widely used.
Signed-off-by: Ken Preslan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: David Teigland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/gfs2/gfs2.h | 77 +++
fs/gfs2/incore.h| 691 +++
include/linux/gfs2_ioctl.h | 30 +
+#ifndef TRUE
+#define TRUE 1
+#endif
+
+#ifndef FALSE
+#define FALSE 0
+#endif
eh why can't you just use the regular kernel conventions
+
+#define NO_CREATE 0
+#define CREATE 1
+
+#define NO_WAIT 0
+#define WAIT 1
+
+#define NO_FORCE 0
+#define FORCE 1
these deserve enums
On Iau, 2005-09-01 at 03:59 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
- Why the kernel needs two clustered fileystems
So delete reiserfs4, FAT, VFAT, ext2, and all the other junk.
- Why GFS is better than OCFS2, or has functionality which OCFS2 cannot
possibly gain (or vice versa)
- Relative merits
Code that manages block allocation.
Signed-off-by: Ken Preslan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: David Teigland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/gfs2/bits.c | 179 +++
fs/gfs2/bits.h | 28 +
fs/gfs2/rgrp.c | 1374 +
fs/gfs2/rgrp.h | 62 ++
Code that handles directory operations.
Signed-off-by: Ken Preslan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: David Teigland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/gfs2/dir.c | 2158 ++
fs/gfs2/dir.h | 51 +
2 files changed, 2209 insertions(+)
---
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 04:19:34PM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
+/* Endian functions */
e again why??
Why is this a compiletime hack?
Either you care about either-endian on disk, at which point it has to be
a runtime thing, or you make the on disk layout fixed endian, at which
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 03:49:18PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
- Why GFS is better than OCFS2, or has functionality which OCFS2 cannot
possibly gain (or vice versa)
- Relative merits of the two offerings
You missed the important one - people actively use it and have been for
some years.
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 04:19:34PM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
+/* Endian functions */
e again why??
Why is this a compiletime hack?
Either you care about either-endian on disk, at which point it has to be
a runtime thing, or you make the on disk layout fixed endian, at which
That's GFS. The submission is about a GFS2 that's on-disk incompatible
to GFS.
Just like say reiserfs3 and reiserfs4 or ext and ext2 or ext2 and ext3
then. I think the main point still stands - we have always taken
multiple file systems on board and we have benefitted enormously from
having
On 2005-09-01T16:28:30, Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Competition will decide if OCFS or GFS is better, or indeed if someone
comes along with another contender that is better still. And competition
will probably get the answer right.
Competition will come up with the same situation like
On Thu, 1 September 2005 22:59:48 +0800, David Teigland wrote:
We offered to removed this when I explained it before. It sounds like it
would give you some comfort so I'll just go ahead and do it barring any
pleas otherwise.
Please do. Just have one test machine with an endianness
On Thursday 01 September 2005 10:49, Alan Cox wrote:
On Iau, 2005-09-01 at 03:59 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
- Why GFS is better than OCFS2, or has functionality which OCFS2 cannot
possibly gain (or vice versa)
- Relative merits of the two offerings
You missed the important one -
On Thursday 01 September 2005 06:46, David Teigland wrote:
I'd like to get a list of specific things remaining for merging.
Where are the benchmarks and stability analysis? How many hours does it
survive cerberos running on all nodes simultaneously? Where are the
testimonials from users?
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 04:28:30PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
That's GFS. The submission is about a GFS2 that's on-disk incompatible
to GFS.
Just like say reiserfs3 and reiserfs4 or ext and ext2 or ext2 and ext3
then. I think the main point still stands - we have always taken
multiple file
I just started looking at gfs. To understand it you'd need to look at it
from the entire cluster solution point of view.
This is a good document from David. It's not about GFS in particular but
about the architecture of the cluster.
http://people.redhat.com/~teigland/sca.pdf
Hua
Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Iau, 2005-09-01 at 03:59 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
- Why the kernel needs two clustered fileystems
So delete reiserfs4, FAT, VFAT, ext2, and all the other junk.
Well, we did delete intermezzo.
I was looking for technical reasons, please.
- Why
Hi.
Here is my new trial for the resize lock issue.
Basically, it goes as follows:
To ensure that only one resizer is running at a time, I added a global
lock that is acquired in the very beginning of ext3_group_add and
ext3_group_extend.
lock_super is now only used in ext3_group_add in the
29 matches
Mail list logo
