Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Review\:\s+Be\s+smarter\s+about\s+handling\s+ENOSPC\s+during\s+writeback\s*$/: 16 ]

Total 16 documents matching your query.

1. Review: Be smarter about handling ENOSPC during writeback (score: 1)
Author: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 14:52:19 +1000
During delayed allocation extent conversion or unwritten extent conversion, we need to reserve some blocks for transactions reservations. We need to reserve these blocks in case a btree split occurs
/archives/xfs/2007-06/msg00027.html (16,613 bytes)

2. Re: Review: Be smarter about handling ENOSPC during writeback (score: 1)
Author: Timothy Shimmin <tes@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 16:13:12 +1000
As previously discussed, the idea sounds reasonable to me. I'll look at the patch shortly. --Tim --On 4 June 2007 2:52:19 PM +1000 David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx> wrote: During delayed allocation extent
/archives/xfs/2007-06/msg00033.html (18,181 bytes)

3. Re: Review: Be smarter about handling ENOSPC during writeback (score: 1)
Author: Timothy Shimmin <tes@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 19:41:19 +1000
Hi Dave, As an aside, I don't understand the following bit of code in xfs_reserve_blocks(): /* * If our previous reservation was larger than the current value, * then move any unused blocks back to t
/archives/xfs/2007-06/msg00046.html (19,133 bytes)

4. Re: Review: Be smarter about handling ENOSPC during writeback (score: 1)
Author: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2007 00:11:54 +1000
Because mp->m_resblks_avail is the amount of reservation space we have *unallocated*. i.e. 0 <= mp->m_resblks_avail <= mp->m_resblks IOWs, when we have used some blocks and then change mp->m_resblks,
/archives/xfs/2007-06/msg00047.html (11,597 bytes)

5. Re: Review: Be smarter about handling ENOSPC during writeback (score: 1)
Author: Timothy Shimmin <tes@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2007 15:28:14 +1000
Hi Dave, Putting the xfs_reserve_blocks discussion to the side.... (discussed separately) Back to the review, looking at the changes: --On 4 June 2007 2:52:19 PM +1000 David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx> wro
/archives/xfs/2007-06/msg00122.html (20,418 bytes)

6. Re: Review: Be smarter about handling ENOSPC during writeback (score: 1)
Author: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 17:33:42 +1000
*nod* BTW, did you try that patch I sent? Yes, and so now you can grow a completely full filesystem :) It's a SWAG. I think it's sufficient to begin with. If it proves to be a problem, then we can ch
/archives/xfs/2007-06/msg00124.html (11,478 bytes)

7. Re: Review: Be smarter about handling ENOSPC during writeback (score: 1)
Author: Nathan Scott <nscott@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 09:13:45 +1000
It would be more correct of XFS to start doing the right thing by reporting different values for b_free and b_avail in statfs(2) - this code in xfs_mount.c::xfs_statvfs() ... statp->f_bfree = statp->
/archives/xfs/2007-06/msg00159.html (9,939 bytes)

8. Re: Review: Be smarter about handling ENOSPC during writeback (score: 1)
Author: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 13:09:33 +1000
Ok, yeah, that'd work. Something like: -- fs/xfs/xfs_vfsops.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) Index: 2.6.x-xfs-new/fs/xfs/xfs_vfsops.c == -- 2.6.x-xfs-new.orig/fs/xfs/xfs_vfsops.c 2007-06-08 21:
/archives/xfs/2007-06/msg00167.html (10,673 bytes)

9. Review: Be smarter about handling ENOSPC during writeback (score: 1)
Author: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 14:52:19 +1000
During delayed allocation extent conversion or unwritten extent conversion, we need to reserve some blocks for transactions reservations. We need to reserve these blocks in case a btree split occurs
/archives/xfs/2007-06/msg00520.html (16,613 bytes)

10. Re: Review: Be smarter about handling ENOSPC during writeback (score: 1)
Author: Timothy Shimmin <tes@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 16:13:12 +1000
As previously discussed, the idea sounds reasonable to me. I'll look at the patch shortly. --Tim --On 4 June 2007 2:52:19 PM +1000 David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx> wrote: During delayed allocation extent
/archives/xfs/2007-06/msg00526.html (18,181 bytes)

11. Re: Review: Be smarter about handling ENOSPC during writeback (score: 1)
Author: Timothy Shimmin <tes@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 19:41:19 +1000
Hi Dave, As an aside, I don't understand the following bit of code in xfs_reserve_blocks(): /* * If our previous reservation was larger than the current value, * then move any unused blocks back to t
/archives/xfs/2007-06/msg00539.html (19,133 bytes)

12. Re: Review: Be smarter about handling ENOSPC during writeback (score: 1)
Author: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2007 00:11:54 +1000
Because mp->m_resblks_avail is the amount of reservation space we have *unallocated*. i.e. 0 <= mp->m_resblks_avail <= mp->m_resblks IOWs, when we have used some blocks and then change mp->m_resblks,
/archives/xfs/2007-06/msg00540.html (11,597 bytes)

13. Re: Review: Be smarter about handling ENOSPC during writeback (score: 1)
Author: Timothy Shimmin <tes@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2007 15:28:14 +1000
Hi Dave, Putting the xfs_reserve_blocks discussion to the side.... (discussed separately) Back to the review, looking at the changes: --On 4 June 2007 2:52:19 PM +1000 David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx> wro
/archives/xfs/2007-06/msg00615.html (20,418 bytes)

14. Re: Review: Be smarter about handling ENOSPC during writeback (score: 1)
Author: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 17:33:42 +1000
*nod* BTW, did you try that patch I sent? Yes, and so now you can grow a completely full filesystem :) It's a SWAG. I think it's sufficient to begin with. If it proves to be a problem, then we can ch
/archives/xfs/2007-06/msg00617.html (11,478 bytes)

15. Re: Review: Be smarter about handling ENOSPC during writeback (score: 1)
Author: Nathan Scott <nscott@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 09:13:45 +1000
It would be more correct of XFS to start doing the right thing by reporting different values for b_free and b_avail in statfs(2) - this code in xfs_mount.c::xfs_statvfs() ... statp->f_bfree = statp->
/archives/xfs/2007-06/msg00652.html (9,939 bytes)

16. Re: Review: Be smarter about handling ENOSPC during writeback (score: 1)
Author: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 13:09:33 +1000
Ok, yeah, that'd work. Something like: -- fs/xfs/xfs_vfsops.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) Index: 2.6.x-xfs-new/fs/xfs/xfs_vfsops.c == -- 2.6.x-xfs-new.orig/fs/xfs/xfs_vfsops.c 2007-06-08 21:
/archives/xfs/2007-06/msg00660.html (10,673 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu