Hi Justin,
Perhaps this explains why nautilus and a few other gnome apps have this
issue,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=140744
It is probably a libgnome/libc(statvfs?) bug, I don't know (both nautilus
and df make the exact same call to statfs64 and perform different calculations
to compute the available disk-space)
I see the following comments in nfs statfs code,
/*
* Current versions of glibc do not correctly handle the
* case where f_frsize != f_bsize. Eventually we want to
* report the value of wtmult in this field.
*/
buf->f_frsize = sb->s_blocksize;
/*
* On most *nix systems, f_blocks, f_bfree, and f_bavail
* are reported in units of f_frsize. Linux hasn't had
* an f_frsize field in its statfs struct until recently,
* thus historically Linux's sys_statfs reports these
* fields in units of f_bsize.
*/
buf->f_bsize = sb->s_blocksize;
So perhaps, we should also do the same in super.c by setting
buf->f_frsize to sb->s_blocksize similar to what you are doing in your
patch to workaround this..
Thanks,
Murali
On Tue, 10 Jan 2006, Justin Mazzola Paluska wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 01:41:29AM -0600, Sam Lang wrote:
> > >(using strace, the system call that Python's os.statvfs actually makes
> > >is:
> > >
> > > statfs64("/RAIDS/RAID_2", 84, {f_type=0x20030528, f_bsize=4194304,
> > > f_blocks=1001258, f_bfree=705068, f_bavail=705068,
> > >f_files=4294967292,
> > > f_ffree=4294967277, f_fsid={2016975803, 0}, f_namelen=255,
> > > f_frsize=1024}) = 0
> > >)
> > >
> > >705,068 1KB blocks would give me the 688MB free.
> > >
> >
> > But that's using f_frsize as the block size, which is actually the
> > fragment size. If you use f_bsize as the block size, the f_bavail
> > looks correct. For the 2.4 kernel, we just set f_frsize to 1024,
> > which is why you're seeing those results. It looks like the 2.6
> > kernel doesn't have the f_frsize field in the statfs struct, so
> > you'll probably have more luck if you're able to update to the 2.6
>
> I should have said, but this result is from a system running a 2.6
> kernel and kernel module. 2.6.14 to be exact.
>
> Looking at src/kernel/linux-2.6/super.c:370 it looks like the f_frsize
> is set to 1024 by default in the 2.6 kernel too.
>
> Applying the attached patch sets f_frsize to f_bsize and fixes my
> problems in Nautilus. However, is this a kosher thing to do? I don't
> know much about kernel data structures. Turning this question around,
> is there a specific reason why f_frsize is set to 1024?
>
> > kernel. I'm curious why Nautilus and other tools use don't use the
> > f_bsize field (seems like a bug)...if you're able to strace the
> > Nautilus process that might be enlightening.
>
> I've attached a bzip2 of an strace of nautilus cut down to the 2
> second snippet where I'm accessing the PVFS2 mountpoint
> (/RAIDS/RAID_2). This is using the kernel module without the patch
> from above. The expanded file is about 310K. However, it looks like
> it makes the same statfs64 call with the same return values.
> --Justin
>
_______________________________________________
PVFS2-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.beowulf-underground.org/mailman/listinfo/pvfs2-users
