Re: new mballoc patches.

2007-09-29 Thread Alex Tomas
Hi, yes, it's absolutely safe to remove. I just wanted to see how many collisions happen in "real life". On 9/14/07, Aneesh Kumar K.V <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Alex, > > Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > > > > I checked the logs today for the fsstress run i found this in my dmesg > > log. The > > s

Re: new mballoc patches.

2007-09-26 Thread Aneesh Kumar K.V
Andrew Morton wrote: On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 13:59:26 +0530 "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I have updated the mballoc patches. Has anyone reviewed this stuff? I don't see much evidence of it here? Just a quick scan shows up heavy over-inlining, many macros-which-should-be-funct

Re: new mballoc patches.

2007-09-26 Thread Andrew Morton
On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 13:59:26 +0530 "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have updated the mballoc patches. Has anyone reviewed this stuff? I don't see much evidence of it here? Just a quick scan shows up heavy over-inlining, many macros-which-should-be-functions and numerous needles

Re: new mballoc patches.

2007-09-14 Thread Aneesh Kumar K.V
Hi Alex, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: I checked the logs today for the fsstress run i found this in my dmesg log. The same stack trace is repeated for many times uh! busy PA Call Trace: [c000efa72fc0] [c000fe30] .show_stack+0x6c/0x1a0 (unreliable) [c000efa73060] [c01954a0

Re: new mballoc patches.

2007-09-12 Thread Aneesh Kumar K.V
I checked the logs today for the fsstress run i found this in my dmesg log. The same stack trace is repeated for many times uh! busy PA Call Trace: [c000efa72fc0] [c000fe30] .show_stack+0x6c/0x1a0 (unreliable) [c000efa73060] [c01954a0] .ext4_mb_discard_group_preallocati

Re: new mballoc patches.

2007-09-12 Thread Mingming Cao
On Wed, 2007-09-12 at 23:29 +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > Valerie, > > > Valerie Clement wrote: > > Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > >> > >> running fsstress on ppc64 give me > >> EXT4-fs: group 9: 16384 blocks in bitmap, 32254 in gd > >> EXT4-fs error (device sda7): ext4_mb_mark_diskspace_used: Allo

Re: new mballoc patches.

2007-09-12 Thread Aneesh Kumar K.V
Valerie, Valerie Clement wrote: Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: running fsstress on ppc64 give me EXT4-fs: group 9: 16384 blocks in bitmap, 32254 in gd EXT4-fs error (device sda7): ext4_mb_mark_diskspace_used: Allocating block in system zone - block = 294915 EXT4-fs error (device sda7): ext4_ext_

Re: new mballoc patches.

2007-09-11 Thread Mingming Cao
On Tue, 2007-09-11 at 13:59 +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > I have updated the mballoc patches. The same can be found at > > http://www.radian.org/~kvaneesh/ext4/patch-series/ > > > > The series file is > > # This series applies on GIT commit b07d68b5ca4d55a16fab223d63d5fb36f89ff42f > ext4-j

Re: new mballoc patches.

2007-09-11 Thread Aneesh Kumar K.V
Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: I have updated the mballoc patches. The same can be found at http://www.radian.org/~kvaneesh/ext4/patch-series/ Test status: Minor testing with KVM. I also didn't do a PPC build. running fsstress on ppc64 give me EXT4-fs: group 9: 16384 blocks in bitmap, 3225

new mballoc patches.

2007-09-11 Thread Aneesh Kumar K.V
I have updated the mballoc patches. The same can be found at http://www.radian.org/~kvaneesh/ext4/patch-series/ The series file is # This series applies on GIT commit b07d68b5ca4d55a16fab223d63d5fb36f89ff42f ext4-journal_chksum-2.6.20.patch ext4-journal-chksum-review-fix.patch ext4_uninit_b