On Fri 16-06-17 18:50:58, Tahsin Erdogan wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Jan Kara <j...@suse.cz> wrote:
> > Hum, rather handle this similarly to how we handle delalloc reserved space.
> > Add a callback to dq_ops to get "inode usage" of an inode and then use it
> > in dquot_transfer(), dquot_free_inode(), dquot_alloc_inode().
> I tried that approach by adding a "int get_inode_usage(struct inode
> *inode, qsize_t *usage)" callback to dquot_operations. Unfortunately,
> ext4 code that calculates the number of internal inodes
> (ext4_xattr_inode_count()) is subject to failures so the callback has
> to be able to report errors. And, that itself is problematic because
> we can't afford to have errors in dquot_free_inode(). If you have
> thoughts about how to address this please let me know.

Well, you can just make dquot_free_inode() return error. Now most callers
won't be able to do much with an error from dquot_free_inode() but that's
the case also for other things during inode deletion - just handle it as
other fatal failures during inode freeing.

> Alternatively, I could try to make this patch less intrusive by
> keeping the existing dquot_transfer() signature and add a new
> dquot_transfer_usage() that accepts inode_usage as a parameter. What
> do you think?

That would be somewhat better than what you do in this patch but I prefer
to handle this like I suggested above.

Jan Kara <j...@suse.com>

Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
Jfs-discussion mailing list

Reply via email to