Hi,
vfat does not know about ownership, hence the files are always owned by the
vfat mounter (or whatever the uid= option specified). Which brings
a problem to userspace programs trying to utime() but which do not
run as the same user as the vfat mounter, because:
fs/attr.c:53
ret =
2007/7/10, Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I am not sure how this could be dealt with besides passing -o quiet to
mount.vfat. Any ideas?
The problem is in the function utimes. I have mounted vfat partition
as a root, then changed permissions to 777 for all files. However, I
wasn't be able t
On Jul 10 2007 12:18, Pawel Dziepak wrote:
>
> Single UNIX Specification says crealy that to do utimes on a file user
> have to had write permissions or be a file owner.
Linux does check for write permission, but _only_ for time=NULL.
Hence it would be helpful if someone knows the exact SUS text,
On 7/10/07, Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Linux does check for write permission, but _only_ for time=NULL.
Hence it would be helpful if someone knows the exact SUS text,
or whether this is not explicitly specified in SUS, leaving room
for interpretation.
I have already checked it str
Tejun Heo wrote:
[ cc'ing Ric Wheeler for storage array thingie. Hi, whole thread is at
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.device-mapper.devel/3344 ]
I am actually on the list, just really, really far behind in the thread ;-)
Hello,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
but when you consider
This is the latest fallocate patchset and is rebased to 2.6.22.
Following are the changes from TAKE5:
1) Rebased to 2.6.22
2) Added compat wrapper for x86_64
3) Dropped s390 and ia64 patches, since the platform maintaners can
add the support for fallocate once it is in mainline.
4) Added a chan
Following is the modified version of the manpage originally submitted by
David Chinner. Please use `nroff -man fallocate.2 | less` to view.
.TH fallocate 2
.SH NAME
fallocate \- allocate or remove file space
.SH SYNOPSIS
.nf
.B #include
.PP
.BI "int syscall(int, int fd, int mode, loff_t offset,
From: Amit Arora <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
sys_fallocate() implementation on i386, x86_64 and powerpc
fallocate() is a new system call being proposed here which will allow
applications to preallocate space to any file(s) in a file system.
Each file system implementation that wants to use this feature w
From: Amit Arora <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Implement new flags and values for mode argument.
This patch implements the new flags and values for the "mode" argument
of the fallocate system call. It is based on the discussion between
Andreas Dilger and David Chinner on the man page proposed (by the later
From: Amit Arora <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
fallocate support in ext4
This patch implements ->fallocate() inode operation in ext4. With this
patch users of ext4 file systems will be able to use fallocate() system
call for persistent preallocation. Current implementation only supports
preallocation for r
From: Amit Arora <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
write support for preallocated blocks
This patch adds write support to the uninitialized extents that get
created when a preallocation is done using fallocate(). It takes care of
splitting the extents into multiple (upto three) extents and merging the
new spl
From: Amit Arora <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Support new values of mode in ext4.
This patch supports new mode values/flags in ext4. With this patch ext4
will be able to support FALLOC_ALLOCATE and FALLOC_RESV_SPACE modes. Supporting
FALLOC_DEALLOCATE and FALLOC_UNRESV_SPACE fallocate modes in ext4 is a wo
From: Amit Arora <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Change on-disk format for extent to represent uninitialized/initialized extents
This change was suggested by Andreas Dilger as part of the following
post:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg02445.html
This patch changes the EXT_MAX_LEN value and
This patch aims to demonstrate one way to replace buffer heads with a few
extent trees. Buffer heads provide a few different features:
1) Mapping of logical file offset to blocks on disk
2) Recording state (dirty, locked etc)
3) Providing a mechanism to access sub-page sized blocks.
This patch c
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 01:48:20AM +0530, Amit K. Arora wrote:
> .BI "int syscall(int, int fd, int mode, loff_t offset, loff_t len);
Correction: "int syscall(int fd, int mode, ...)",
> .SH "ERRORS"
> .TP
> .B EBADF
> .I fd
> is not a valid file descriptor, or is not opened for writing.
> .TP
> .B
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:35:48 -0400
Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Add a mount option to turn off extents.
Please update the changelog to describe the reason for making this change.
> Signed-off-by: Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ---
> Index: linux-2.6.22-rc4/fs/ext4/super.c
> ===
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:36:01 -0400
Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Turn on extents feature by default in ext4 filesystem. User could use
> -o noextents to turn it off.
>
Oh, there you go.
>
> Index: linux-2.6.22-rc4/fs/ext4/super.c
> ==
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:36:32 -0400
Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Set the journals JBD2_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_64BIT on devices with more
> than 32bit block sizes during mount time. This ensure proper record
> lenth when writing to the journal.
This patch isn't in Ted's kernel.org directory
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:36:12 -0400
Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Propagate flags such as S_APPEND, S_IMMUTABLE, etc. from i_flags into
> ext4-specific i_flags. Hence, when someone sets these flags via a different
> interface than ioctl, they are stored correctly.
>
This changelog is
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:36:48 -0400
Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Jun 07, 2007 23:45 -0500, Jose R. Santos wrote:
> > > The jbd2-debug file used to be located in /proc/sys/fs/jbd2-debug, but
> > > create_proc_entry() does not do lookups on file names with more that one
> > > direc
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:36:56 -0400
Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This patch is a spinoff of the old nanosecond patches.
I don't know what the "old nanosecond patches" are. A link to a suitable
changlog for those patches would do in a pinch. Preferable would be to
write a proper chan
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:37:04 -0400
Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This patch converts the 32-bit i_version in the generic inode to a 64-bit
> i_version field.
>
That's obvious from the patch. But what was the reason for making this
(unrelated to ext4) change?
Please update the chang
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:37:16 -0400
Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This patch adds a 32-bit i_version_hi field to ext4_inode, which can be used
> for 64-bit inode versions. This field will store the higher 32 bits of the
> version, while Jean Noel's patch has added support to store the
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:36:22 -0400
Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> with the patch all headers are checked. the code should become
> more resistant to on-disk corruptions. needless BUG_ON() have
> been removed. please, review for inclusion.
>
> ...
> @@ -269,6 +239,70 @@
> return
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:37:36 -0400
Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This patch adds 64-bit inode version support to ext4. The lower 32 bits
> are stored in the osd1.linux1.l_i_version field while the high 32 bits
> are stored in the i_version_hi field newly created in the ext4_inode.
So
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:37:45 -0400
Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This patch is on top of i_version_update_vfs.
> The i_version field of the inode is set on inode creation and incremented when
> the inode is being modified.
>
Again, I don't think I've ever seen this patch before. It
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:37:53 -0400
Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Add a "noversion" mount option to disable inode version updates.
Why is this option being offered to our users? To reduce disk traffic,
like noatime?
If so, what are the implications of this? What would the user lose?
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:38:01 -0400
Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This patch is on top of the nanosecond timestamp and i_version_hi
> patches.
This sort of information isn't needed (or desired) when this patch hits the
git tree. Please ensure that things like this are cleaned up befo
On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 16:30 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:35:48 -0400
> Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Add a mount option to turn off extents.
>
> Please update the changelog to describe the reason for making this change.
>
>
Sure, I will update the change
On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 16:30 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:36:32 -0400
> Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Set the journals JBD2_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_64BIT on devices with more
> > than 32bit block sizes during mount time. This ensure proper record
> > lenth when wri
On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 16:30 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:36:01 -0400
> Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Turn on extents feature by default in ext4 filesystem. User could use
> > -o noextents to turn it off.
> >
>
> Oh, there you go.
>
> >
> > Index: linux-2
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 14:39:41 EDT, Ric Wheeler said:
> All of the high end arrays have non-volatile cache (read, on power loss, it
> is a
> promise that it will get all of your data out to permanent storage). You
> don't
> need to ask this kind of array to drain the cache. In fact, it might jus
On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 16:30 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:37:04 -0400
> Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > This patch converts the 32-bit i_version in the generic inode to a 64-bit
> > i_version field.
> >
>
> That's obvious from the patch. But what was the rea
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 18:09:40 -0400 Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 16:30 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:37:04 -0400
> > Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > This patch converts the 32-bit i_version in the generic inode to a 64-b
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 06:18:20 +1000, Amit K. Arora
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Following is the modified version of the manpage originally submitted by
David Chinner. Please use `nroff -man fallocate.2 | less` to view.
A few more touch-ups attached.
Regards,
Barry.
fallocate.2
Description: B
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 01:50:00 +0530 "Amit K. Arora" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- linux-2.6.22.orig/arch/x86_64/ia32/sys_ia32.c
> +++ linux-2.6.22/arch/x86_64/ia32/sys_ia32.c
> @@ -879,3 +879,11 @@ asmlinkage long sys32_fadvise64(int fd,
> return sys_fadvise64_64(fd, ((u64)offset_hi << 3
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:38:10 -0400 Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [PATCH] jbd2 stats through procfs
>
> The patch below updates the jbd stats patch to 2.6.20/jbd2.
> The initial patch was posted by Alex Tomas in December 2005
> (http://marc.info/?l=linux-ext4&m=113538565128617&w=2).
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 14:39:41 EDT, Ric Wheeler said:
>
>> All of the high end arrays have non-volatile cache (read, on power loss, it
>> is a
>> promise that it will get all of your data out to permanent storage). You
>> don't
>> need to ask this kind of array to drai
Ric Wheeler wrote:
>> Don't those thingies usually have NV cache or backed by battery such
>> that ORDERED_DRAIN is enough?
>
> All of the high end arrays have non-volatile cache (read, on power loss,
> it is a promise that it will get all of your data out to permanent
> storage). You don't need t
On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 18:22 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 18:09:40 -0400 Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 16:30 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:37:04 -0400
> > > Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > T
2007/7/10, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi all,
> + size = sizeof(struct transaction_stats_s);
> + s->stats = kmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (s == NULL) {
> + kfree(s);
> + return -EIO;
ENOMEM
I'm sorry if i missed some point, but i just don't see
On Tuesday July 10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Yes, thanks. It doesn't actually tell us why we want to implement
> this attribute and it doesn't tell us what the implications of failing
> to do so are, but I guess we can take that on trust from the NFS guys.
You would like to think so, but rem
On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 13:21 +1000, Neil Brown wrote:
> On Tuesday July 10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > Yes, thanks. It doesn't actually tell us why we want to implement
> > this attribute and it doesn't tell us what the implications of failing
> > to do so are, but I guess we can take that o
On Tue, Jul 10, 2007 at 05:35:13PM -0400, Mingming Cao wrote:
>
> Sorry about this. I was using version 0.04. The latest one I can find
> for now is 0.05(searching lkml), but it didn't catch this codling style
> bug either. I appreciate if anyone can point me the version 0.07, thanks
It's now
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 20:19:16 -0400 Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 18:22 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 18:09:40 -0400 Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 16:30 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > On Sun, 01
On Tue, Jul 10, 2007 at 11:21:49PM -0400, Cédric Augonnet wrote:
> 2007/7/10, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Hi all,
>
> >> + size = sizeof(struct transaction_stats_s);
> >> + s->stats = kmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
> >> + if (s == NULL) {
^
> >> + kfr
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 23:21:49 -0400 "Cédric Augonnet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2007/7/10, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Hi all,
>
> > > + size = sizeof(struct transaction_stats_s);
> > > + s->stats = kmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
> > > + if (s == NULL) {
> > > +
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 12:10:34PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 01:50:00 +0530 "Amit K. Arora" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > --- linux-2.6.22.orig/arch/x86_64/ia32/sys_ia32.c
> > +++ linux-2.6.22/arch/x86_64/ia32/sys_ia32.c
> > @@ -879,3 +879,11 @@ asmlinkage long sys32
On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 16:30 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:36:56 -0400
> Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > This patch is a spinoff of the old nanosecond patches.
>
> I don't know what the "old nanosecond patches" are. A link to a suitable
> changlog for those pa
It just occurred to me:
If i_version is 64bit, then knfsd would need to be careful when
reading it on a 32bit host. What are the locking rules?
Presumably it is only updated under i_mutex protection, but having to
get i_mutex to read it would seem a little heavy handed.
Should it use a se
On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 13:21 +1000, Neil Brown wrote:
> On Tuesday July 10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > Yes, thanks. It doesn't actually tell us why we want to implement
> > this attribute and it doesn't tell us what the implications of failing
> > to do so are, but I guess we can take that o
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 22:09:08 -0400 Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David Chinneer pointed that we need to journal the version number
> updates together with the operations that causes the change of the inode
> version number, in order to survive server crashes so clients won't see
> the
On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 21:42 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 23:21:49 -0400 "Cédric Augonnet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > 2007/7/10, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > > > + size = sizeof(struct transaction_stats_s);
> > > > + s->stats = k
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 15:05:27 +1000 Neil Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It just occurred to me:
>
> If i_version is 64bit, then knfsd would need to be careful when
> reading it on a 32bit host. What are the locking rules?
>
> Presumably it is only updated under i_mutex protection, but
On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 21:22 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 20:19:16 -0400 Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 18:22 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 18:09:40 -0400 Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tue,
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 16:30:25 -0700
Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:36:48 -0400
> Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 07, 2007 23:45 -0500, Jose R. Santos wrote:
> > > > The jbd2-debug file used to be located in /proc/sys/fs/jbd2-debug, but
> >
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:38:18 -0400 Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu May 17 17:21:08 2007
> Hi,
>
> I have rebased this patch to 2.6.22-rc1 so that it can be added to the
> ext4 patch queue. It has been tested by creating more than 65000 subdirs
> and then dele
On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 00:38 -0500, Jose R. Santos wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 16:30:25 -0700
> Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:36:48 -0400
> > Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > > On Jun 07, 2007 23:45 -0500, Jose R. Santos wrote:
> > > > > T
On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 23:35 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2007 at 05:35:13PM -0400, Mingming Cao wrote:
> >
> > Sorry about this. I was using version 0.04. The latest one I can find
> > for now is 0.05(searching lkml), but it didn't catch this codling style
> > bug either. I appre
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:38:25 -0400 Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Journal checksum feature has been added to detect corruption of journal.
That was brief. No description of what it does, how it does it, why it
does it, how one operates it, why (or why not) one would choose to enable
i
On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 22:17 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 22:09:08 -0400 Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > David Chinneer pointed that we need to journal the version number
> > updates together with the operations that causes the change of the inode
> > version numb
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:38:51 -0400 Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Subject: [EXT4 set 9][PATCH 4/5]Morecleanups:ext4_extent_compilation_fixes
> Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:38:51 -0400
> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Organization: IBM Linux Technology Center
> X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:38:59 -0400 Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Dmitry Monakhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: ext4: extent macros cleanup
>
> - Replace math equation to it's macro equivalent
s/it's/its/;)
> - make ext4_ext_grow_indepth() indexes/leaf correct
hm, what was wr
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 00:38:09 -0500 "Jose R. Santos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Alternatively (and preferably) do this via an update to
> > Documentation/filesystems/ext4.txt.
>
> Seems like I also need to update the doc on Kconfig as well. Do you
> prefer this in separate patches? (curren
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 23:18:50 -0400 Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 22:17 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 22:09:08 -0400 Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > David Chinneer pointed that we need to journal the version number
> > > upd
65 matches
Mail list logo
