Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Last time I discussed this with David he seemed to find this amusing rather
than an urgent problem.
Amusing? In what way?
I've been at LCA, and I left all but one of my machines powered down because
the local substation broke and has been giving wildly
not to mention machines with 1G of ram (900M lowmem, 128M highmem)
David Lang
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-ext4 in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 09:42:30PM +0900, Takashi Sato wrote:
I am also wondering whether we should have system call(s) for these:
On Jan 25, 2008 12:59 PM, Takashi Sato [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+ case EXT3_IOC_FREEZE: {
+ case EXT3_IOC_THAW: {
And just convert XFS to use
On Sat, Jan 26, 2008 at 04:35:26PM +1100, David Chinner wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 07:59:38PM +0900, Takashi Sato wrote:
The points of the implementation are followings.
- Add calls of the freeze function (freeze_bdev) and
the unfreeze function (thaw_bdev) in ext3_ioctl
On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 07:59:38PM +0900, Takashi Sato wrote:
The points of the implementation are followings.
- Add calls of the freeze function (freeze_bdev) and
the unfreeze function (thaw_bdev) in ext3_ioctl().
- ext3_freeze_timeout() which calls the unfreeze function (thaw_bdev)
is
On Mon, Jan 21, 2008 at 04:00:41PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
On Jan 16, 2008 13:30 -0800, Valerie Henson wrote:
I have a partial solution that sort of blindly manages the buffer
cache. First, the user passes e2fsck a parameter saying how much
memory is available as buffer cache. The
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 01:30:43PM -0800, Valerie Henson wrote:
Hi y'all,
This is a request for comments on the rewrite of the e2fsck IO
parallelization patches I sent out a few months ago. The mechanism is
totally different. Previously IO was parallelized by issuing IOs from
multiple
From: Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2007 10:22:39 -0800
That's
J_ASSERT_BH(bh, !buffer_jbddirty(bh));
at the end of journal_unmap_buffer().
I don't recall seeing that before and I can't think of anything we've
done recently which could cause it, sorry.
If
)dentry-d_inode-i_version);
Hmmm... In AFS's case this is overkill... The value contained in i_version
is going to be a 32-bit number because that's all the protocol supports.
David
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-ext4 in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 02:30:06AM +0530, Kalpak Shah wrote:
Recently there was discussion about an FIle Extent MAP(FIEMAP) ioctl for
efficiently mapping the extents and holes of a file. This will be many times
more efficient than FIBMAP by cutting down the number of ioctls.
This patch
On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 01:45:07PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
By request on #linuxfs, here is the FIEMAP spec that we used to implement
the FIEMAP support for ext4. There was an ext4 patch posted on August 29
to linux-ext4 entitled [PATCH] FIEMAP ioctl.
Link:
to make this so)
David Lang
A checksum has
been added to block group descriptors so we can tell detect corruption
in that data structure, since we are depending on it being accurate so
we know what portion of the inode table is really in use.
The second feature is flexible block groups, which
On Mon, Jul 30, 2007 at 08:27:47AM -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote:
On Mon, 2007-07-30 at 09:29 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 05:02:09PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
Please correct me if any of the following assumptions is wrong:
- SELinux is currently the only user
On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 05:02:09PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
Please correct me if any of the following assumptions is wrong:
- SELinux is currently the only user of filesystem security labels
shipped with the Linux kernel
- if a user has SELinux enabled he wants his filesystems to support
On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 04:09:20PM +0400, Alex Tomas wrote:
David Chinner wrote:
On Fri, Jul 27, 2007 at 11:51:56AM +0400, Alex Tomas wrote:
But this is really irrelevant - the issue at hand is what we want
for VFS level delalloc support. IMO, that mechanism needs to support
both XFS and ext4
[please don't top post!]
On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 05:33:08PM +0400, Alex Tomas wrote:
Jeff Garzik wrote:
The XFS one is proven and the work was already completed.
What were the specific technical issues that made it unsuitable for ext4?
I would rather not reinvent the wheel, particularly
Initial implementation of -fallocate for XFS.
Version 2:
o Make allocation and setting the file size atomic.
o Drop deallocate/punch functionality
o use mode field appropriately to determine if size needs changing.
---
fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_iops.c | 47
FYI.
Initial support for fallocate-based pre-allocation in
xfs_io for testing. This currently only works on ia64 because
of the hard coded syscall number and will require autoconf
magic to conditionally compile in this support.
This allows simple command-line based testing of fallocate
based
On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 12:58:13PM +0530, Suparna Bhattacharya wrote:
Why don't we just merge the interface for preallocation (essentially
enough to satisfy posix_fallocate() and the simple XFS requirement for
space reservation without changing file size), which there is clear agreement
on
On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 11:21:11AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 04:02:47PM +0530, Amit K. Arora wrote:
Can you clarify - what is the current behaviour when ENOSPC (or some other
error) is hit? Does it keep the current fallocate() or does it free it?
On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 11:49:13PM +0530, Amit K. Arora wrote:
On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 09:18:04AM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 11:34:13AM -0400, Andreas Dilger wrote:
On Jun 26, 2007 16:02 +0530, Amit K. Arora wrote:
On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 03:46:26PM -0600
On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 11:49:15PM -0400, Andreas Dilger wrote:
On Jun 27, 2007 09:14 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
Someone on the XFs list had an interesting request - preallocated
swap files. You can't use unwritten extents for this because
of sys_swapon()s use of bmap() (XFS returns holes
On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 09:28:36AM +1000, Nathan Scott wrote:
On Wed, 2007-06-27 at 23:36 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
Allows setup_swap_extents() to use preallocated files on XFS
filesystems for swap files without ever needing to convert them.
Using unwritten extents (as opposed
On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 03:46:26PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
On Jun 25, 2007 20:33 +0530, Amit K. Arora wrote:
I have not implemented FA_FL_FREE_ENOSPC and FA_ZERO_SPACE flags yet, as
*suggested* by Andreas in http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/6/14/323 post.
If it is decided that these flags
On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 06:58:10PM +0530, Amit K. Arora wrote:
2) The above new patches (4/7 and 7/7) are based on the dicussion
between Andreas Dilger and David Chinner on the mode argument,
when later posted a man page on fallocate.
Can you include the man page in this patch set
to the
application to clean up.
What I mean is that any data read from the file should have the appearance
of being zeroed (whether zeroes are actually written to disk or not). What
I _think_ David is proposing is to allow fallocate() to return without
marking the blocks even uninitialized
On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 03:52:39PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
On Jun 25, 2007 19:15 +0530, Amit K. Arora wrote:
+#define FA_FL_DEALLOC 0x01 /* default is allocate */
+#define FA_FL_KEEP_SIZE0x02 /* default is extend/shrink size */
+#define FA_FL_DEL_DATA 0x04 /* default is
,
update only ctime. Otherwise, update ctime and mtime both.
I'm only being the advocate for requirements David Chinner has put
forward due to existing behaviour in XFS. This is one of the reasons
why I think the flags mechanism we now have - we can encode the
various different behaviours
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 03:14:58AM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
On Jun 14, 2007 09:52 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
B FA_PREALLOCATE
provides the same functionality as
B FA_ALLOCATE
except it does not ever change the file size. This allows allocation
of zero blocks beyond the end of file
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 06:31:53PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 05:57:59PM +0400, Dmitriy Monakhov wrote:
Function prerform check for signgle region, with out respect to
segment nature of iovec, For example writev no longer works :)
Btw, could someone
On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 11:46:52AM +0530, Amit K. Arora wrote:
On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 06:01:57PM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
Minimal definition to replace what applicaitons use on XFS and to
support poasix_fallocate are the thre that have been mentioned so
far (FA_ALLOCATE, FA_PREALLOCATE
On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 04:32:57PM -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 10:21 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
On Fri, May 25, 2007 at 06:25:31PM +0200, Jean noel Cordenner wrote:
Hi,
This is an update of the i_version patch.
The i_version field is a 64bit counter
On Fri, May 25, 2007 at 06:25:31PM +0200, Jean noel Cordenner wrote:
Hi,
This is an update of the i_version patch.
The i_version field is a 64bit counter that is set on every inode
creation and that is incremented every time the inode data is modified
(similarly to the ctime time-stamp).
On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 07:21:16AM -0500, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 13:16 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 01:33:59AM +0530, Amit K. Arora wrote:
Following changes were made to the previous version:
1) Added description before sys_fallocate
On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 01:33:59AM +0530, Amit K. Arora wrote:
This patch implements sys_fallocate() and adds support on i386, x86_64
and powerpc platforms.
Can you please pick up the ia64 support patch I posted as well?
Changelog:
-
Note: The changes below are from the initial post
On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 05:26:20PM +0530, Amit K. Arora wrote:
On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 10:59:26AM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 09:31:02PM +0530, Amit K. Arora wrote:
I have the updated patches ready which take care of Andrew's comments.
Will run some tests and post
?
- David Chinner raised this question in following post:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/4/29/407
I think it makes sense to update the [mc]time for a successfull
preallocation/unallocation. Does anyone feel otherwise ?
It will be interesting to know how XFS behaves currently
On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 03:05:56PM -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 12:50 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 01:56:23PM -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
In any case, it would be useful to add a new set of testsuites for the
new fallocate() syscall and fsstress
, scripted way of
doing it)
or is the problem that you are trying to resize things without remounting
them (and therefor without flushing the journal)
David Lang
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-ext4 in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo
On Thu, May 03, 2007 at 11:28:15PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Fri, 4 May 2007 16:07:31 +1000 David Chinner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, May 03, 2007 at 09:29:55PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 23:33:32 +0530 Amit K. Arora [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 07:46:53PM +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
On 1 May 2007, at 15:20, David Chinner wrote:
So, either the filesystem will understand the flag or iff the
unknown flag
is in the incompat set, it will return EINVAL or else the unknown
flag will
be safely ignored
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 03:30:40PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
On May 01, 2007 14:22 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 04:44:01PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
Hmm, I'd thought offline would migrate to EXTENT_UNKNOWN, but I didn't
I disagree - why would you want
ia64 fallocate syscall support.
Signed-Off-By: Dave Chinner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
arch/ia64/kernel/entry.S |1 +
include/asm-ia64/unistd.h |3 ++-
2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Index: 2.6.x-xfs-new/arch/ia64/kernel/entry.S
On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 10:46:56AM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
Ulrich Drepper wrote:
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
fallocate with the whence argument and flags is already quite complicated,
I'd rather have another call for placement decisions, that would
be called on an fd to do placement
On Fri, Dec 22, 2006 at 11:20:08PM +0300, Alex Tomas wrote:
Good day,
probably the previous set of patches (including mballoc/lg)
is too large. so, I reworked delayed allocation a bit so
that it can be used on top of regular balloc, though it
still can be used with extents-enabled files
On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 07:56:19PM -0500, Josef Sipek wrote:
On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 08:11:00PM +1100, David Chinner wrote:
They are defined but unused in 2.6.19, right? I can't see anywhere
in the 2.6.19 ext2/3/4/reiser trees that actually those flags,
including setting and retrieving them
On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 01:33:55PM -0500, Nikolai Joukov wrote:
As we promised on the linux-ext4 list on October 31, here is the patch
that adds secure deletion via a trash-bin functionality for ext4. It is a
compromise solution that combines secure deletion with the trash-bin support
(the
On Mon, Nov 06, 2006 at 06:44:58PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
On Fri, Nov 03, 2006 at 03:30:30PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
BTW, does use of sysfs mean ASCII encoding of all the data
passing between kernel and userspace?
Not necessarify but mostly yes. At least I intend to have all the
On Thu, Nov 02, 2006 at 03:39:29PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
Hi,
from the thread after my patch implementing ext3 online
defragmentation I found out that probably the only (and definitely the
biggest) issue is the interface. Someone wants is common enough so that
we can profit from common
On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 11:33:16PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 11:40:20AM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
We don't need to expose anything filesystem specific to userspace to
implement this. Online data movement (i.e. the defrag mechanism)
becomes something like
On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 01:37:22PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 01:00:52PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
We don't need to expose anything filesystem specific to userspace to
implement this. Online data movement (i.e. the defrag mechanism)
becomes something like:
do
On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 02:01:42AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 03:38:23PM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 12:48:44AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
So why are you arguing that an interface is no good because it
is fundamentally racy? ;)
My point
On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 01:00:52PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 06:11:37PM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 02:01:42AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 03:38:23PM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 12:48:44AM -0400
On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 12:14:33AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
On Mon, Oct 23, 2006 at 06:31:40PM +0400, Alex Tomas wrote:
isn't that a kernel responsbility to find/allocate target blocks?
wouldn't it better to specify desirable target group and minimal
acceptable chunk of free blocks?
The
On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 09:51:41AM -0500, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
On Tue, 2006-10-24 at 23:59 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 12:14:33AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
On Mon, Oct 23, 2006 at 06:31:40PM +0400, Alex Tomas wrote:
isn't that a kernel responsbility to find
On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 11:26:26AM -0500, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
On Wed, 2006-10-25 at 02:01 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 09:51:41AM -0500, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
On Tue, 2006-10-24 at 23:59 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
That's the wrong way to look at it. if you want
On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 03:44:16PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 11:59:28PM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
That's the wrong way to look at it. if you want the userspace
process to specify a location, then you should preallocate it first
before doing anything else
On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 10:42:57PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 12:30:02PM +1000, Barry Naujok wrote:
Could we have a more abstract method for asking the filesystem where the
free blocks are and then using the same block addressing to tell the
fs where to allocate/move
On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 12:48:44AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 02:27:53PM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
But it a race that is _easily_ handled, and applications only need to
implement one interface, not a different method for every
filesystem that requires deeep
On Wed, Oct 11, 2006 at 11:49:10AM -0500, Steve Lord wrote:
David Chinner wrote:
On Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 10:19:04AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 09:15:28PM -0500, Steve Lord wrote:
Hi Dave,
My recollection is that it used to default to on, it was disabled
because
60 matches
Mail list logo
