On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 02:21:13PM +0200, J??rn Engel wrote:
On Sat, 28 April 2007 17:05:22 -0500, Matt Mackall wrote:
This is a relatively simple scheme for making a filesystem with
incremental online consistency checks of both data and metadata.
Overhead can be well under 1% disk space
On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 08:40:42PM -0500, Matt Mackall wrote:
This does mean that our time to make progress on a check is bounded at
the top by the size of our largest file. If we have a degenerate
filesystem filled with a single file, this will in fact take as long
as a conventional fsck.
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 02:41:50PM +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
Andrew Morton writes:
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 23:33:32 +0530 Amit K. Arora [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
This patch implements the fallocate() system call and adds support for
i386, x86_64 and powerpc.
...
On Tue, 8 May 2007 22:56:09 -0700, Valerie Henson wrote:
I like it too, especially the rmap stuff, but I don't think it solves
some of the problems chunkfs solves. The really nice thing about
chunkfs is that it tries hard to isolate each chunk from all the other
chunks. You can think of
Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+ BUG_ON(i_size 0x); // TODO: use 64-bit store
You're sure this isn't user-triggerable?
Hmmm... I'm not. I'll whip up a patch for this.
kmap_atomic() could be used here and is better.
Yeah. It used to have something that slept in the
On Tue, 8 May 2007 17:01:01 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 01:10:09AM +0200, J??rn Engel wrote:
The remaining question is how to deal with kernel-only code that uses
be64. Convert that to __be64 as well? Or introduce be64 in
include/linix/types.h instead?
I say leave
On Wed, 09 May 2007 11:25:47 +0100 David Howells [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+ set_page_dirty(page);
+
+ if (PageDirty(page))
+ _debug(dirtied);
+
+ return 0;
+}
One would normally run mark_inode_dirty() after any i_size_write()?
Not in this case, I assume,
Suparna Bhattacharya writes:
This looks like it will have the same problem on s390 as
sys_sync_file_range. Maybe the prototype should be:
asmlinkage long sys_fallocate(loff_t offset, loff_t len, int fd, int mode)
Yes, but the trouble is that there was a contrary viewpoint preferring
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 08:50:44PM +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
Suparna Bhattacharya writes:
This looks like it will have the same problem on s390 as
sys_sync_file_range. Maybe the prototype should be:
asmlinkage long sys_fallocate(loff_t offset, loff_t len, int fd, int mode)
On Mon 07-05-07 09:28:30, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 04:14:28PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
On Thu 03-05-07 17:16:02, Greg KH wrote:
On Thu, May 03, 2007 at 11:54:52AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
On Tue 01-05-07 20:26:27, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 07:55:36PM +0200,
Valerie Henson writes:
[...]
Hm, I'm not sure that everyone understands, a particular subtlety of
how the fsck algorithm works in chunkfs. A lot of people seem to
think that you need to check *all* cross-chunk links, every time an
individual chunk is checked. That's not the case;
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 09:37:22PM +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
Suparna Bhattacharya writes:
Of course the interface used by an application program would have the
fd first. Glibc can do the translation.
I think that was understood.
OK, then what does it matter what the
Further fixes for AFS write support:
(1) The afs_send_pages() outer loop must do an extra iteration if it ends
with 'first == last' because 'last' is inclusive in the page set
otherwise it fails to send the last page and complete the RxRPC op under
some circumstances.
(2)
Reduce debugging noise generated by AF_RXRPC.
Signed-off-by: David Howells [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
net/rxrpc/ar-peer.c |4 ++--
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/rxrpc/ar-peer.c b/net/rxrpc/ar-peer.c
index ce08b78..90fa107 100644
--- a/net/rxrpc/ar-peer.c
+++
I have the updated patches ready which take care of Andrew's comments.
Will run some tests and post them soon.
But, before submitting these patches, I think it will be better to finalize
on certain things which might be worth some discussion here:
1) Should the file size change when
On Wed, 09 May 2007 12:07:39 +0100 David Howells [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
set_page_dirty() will set I_DIRTY_PAGES only. ie: the inode has dirty
pagecache data.
To tell the VFS that the inode itself is dirty one needs to run
mark_inode_dirty().
On May 09, 2007 21:31 +0530, Amit K. Arora wrote:
2) For FA_UNALLOCATE mode, should the file system allow unallocation
of normal (non-preallocated) blocks (blocks allocated via
regular write/truncate operations) also (i.e. work as punch()) ?
- Though FA_UNALLOCATE mode is yet to be
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 12:56:39AM -0700, Valerie Henson wrote:
On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 08:40:42PM -0500, Matt Mackall wrote:
This does mean that our time to make progress on a check is bounded at
the top by the size of our largest file. If we have a degenerate
filesystem filled with a
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 21:31 +0530, Amit K. Arora wrote:
I have the updated patches ready which take care of Andrew's comments.
Will run some tests and post them soon.
But, before submitting these patches, I think it will be better to finalize
on certain things which might be worth some
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 03:16:41PM +0400, Nikita Danilov wrote:
I guess I miss something. If chunkfs maintains at most one continuation
per chunk invariant, then continuation inode might end up with multiple
byte ranges, and to check that they do not overlap one has to read
indirect blocks
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 12:06:52PM -0500, Matt Mackall wrote:
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 12:56:39AM -0700, Valerie Henson wrote:
On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 08:40:42PM -0500, Matt Mackall wrote:
This does mean that our time to make progress on a check is bounded at
the top by the size of our
On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 08:40:42PM -0500, Matt Mackall wrote:
On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 07:23:49PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
There are a number of filesystem corruptions this algorithm won't
catch. The most obvious is one where the directory tree isn't really
a tree, but an cyclic graph.
Valerie Henson writes:
[...]
You're right about needing to read the equivalent data-structure - for
other reasons, each continuation inode will need an easily accessible
list of byte ranges covered by that inode. (Sounds like, hey,
extents!) The important part is that you don't have
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 11:59:23AM -0700, Valerie Henson wrote:
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 12:06:52PM -0500, Matt Mackall wrote:
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 12:56:39AM -0700, Valerie Henson wrote:
On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 08:40:42PM -0500, Matt Mackall wrote:
This does mean that our time to
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 12:01:13PM -0700, Valerie Henson wrote:
On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 08:40:42PM -0500, Matt Mackall wrote:
On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 07:23:49PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
There are a number of filesystem corruptions this algorithm won't
catch. The most obvious is one
From: David Howells [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 09 May 2007 14:51:47 +0100
Reduce debugging noise generated by AF_RXRPC.
Signed-off-by: David Howells [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Applied, thanks David.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-fsdevel in
the body of a message to
David Howells wrote:
+/*
+ * prepare a page for being written to
+ */
+static int afs_prepare_page(struct afs_vnode *vnode, struct page *page,
+ struct key *key, unsigned offset, unsigned to)
+{
+ unsigned eof, tail, start, stop, len;
+ loff_t i_size, pos;
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 them soon.
But, before submitting these patches, I think it will be better to finalize
on certain things which might be worth
28 matches
Mail list logo
