linux-ext4 mailing list

FromSubjectDatesort icon
jing zhang
Re: [PATCH] ext4: memory leakage in ext4_mb_init()
Sorry again, Ted. There are so much for a newbie to learn to do cool work, especially to meet your requirements. I am happy, any way, to patch ext4 under your Without the cool git, though I am learning how to take advantage of it, I could not manage all the patches delivered. In fact, I dig the patches with UltraEdit for modifying the C code, Cygwin for git and diff -Npu, and virtual machine for compiling. My kid, 11 years old boy, has to share the HP notebook with me playing games. And ...
Apr 3, 6:05 pm 2010
jing zhang
Re: [PATCH] ext4: add rb_tree cache to struct ext4_group_info
I will check release_blocks_on_commit() and ext4_mb_free_metadata() Do you mean that ext4_mb_generate_from_freelist() can be removed entirely? --
Apr 3, 6:26 pm 2010
tytso
Re: [PATCH] ext4: add rb_tree cache to struct ext4_group_info
Maybe. I need to do more investigation to be sure. The code in mballoc is subtle, and in some places there is stuff which is vestigal or misnamed, but it means that I'm going to be very careful before changing things. It also means that if you submit patches, you need to be very clear what you think the surrounding code is doing, why you think it's wrong, and how your patch make things better. For example, this: The function, ext4_mb_discard_group_preallocations(), works alone as ...
Apr 3, 7:06 pm 2010
tytso
Re: [PATCH] resize: check s_log_groups_per_flex before a ...
Yes, it does make sense to set flex_bg in this case; it allows the group metadata to be stored outside of a blockgroup, which is helpful to e2fsck in some cases when it needs to relocate an inode table and there's no contiguous free space available in the block group. - Ted --
Apr 3, 7:11 pm 2010
tytso
Re: [PATCH] resize: check s_log_groups_per_flex before a ...
Added to the ext4 patch queue, thanks. - Ted --
Apr 3, 7:17 pm 2010
jing zhang
Re: [PATCH] ext4: add rb_tree cache to struct ext4_group_info
Another good lesson, I got it. Thanks - zj --
Apr 3, 11:26 pm 2010
bugzilla-daemon
[Bug 15690] New: system hanged while doing "sync"
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15690 Summary: system hanged while doing "sync" Product: File System Version: 2.5 Kernel Version: 2.6.34-rc2 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Tree: Mainline Status: NEW Severity: blocking Priority: P1 Component: ext4 AssignedTo: fs_ext4@kernel-bugs.osdl.org ReportedBy: htmldeveloper@gmail.com Regression: ...
Apr 4, 7:20 am 2010
bugzilla-daemon
[Bug 15690] system hanged while doing "sync"
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15690 --- Comment #1 from Peter Teoh <htmldeveloper@gmail.com> 2010-04-04 15:00:12 --- The .config file as shown in: http://pastebin.com/RstGt079 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching the assignee of the bug. --
Apr 4, 8:00 am 2010
bugzilla-daemon
[Bug 15690] system hanged while doing "sync"
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15690 Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |sandeen@redhat.com --- Comment #2 from Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> 2010-04-04 15:31:12 --- Likely a dup of https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14830 and possibly not unique to ext4 ... -- ...
Apr 4, 8:31 am 2010
bugzilla-daemon
[Bug 15690] system hanged while doing "sync"
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15690 --- Comment #3 from Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> 2010-04-04 15:34:51 --- Oh wait, sorry I was wrong, this is a null pointer deref, not the same thing at all. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching the assignee of the bug. --
Apr 4, 8:35 am 2010
tytso
Re: fsck more often when powerfail is detected (was Re: ...
Or migrate to ext4, which does use barriers by defaults, as well as journal-level checksumming. :-) As far as changing the default to enable barriers for ext3, you'll need to talk to akpm about that; he's the one who has been against it in the past. - Ted --
Apr 4, 10:39 am 2010
tytso
Re: [PATCH] ext4: memory leakage in ext4_mb_init()
How much testing are you doing before submitting patches, out of Having independent patches is actually better --- but I think you're misunderstanding what I was complaining about before. Patches should that are accepted into mainline should do one and only one thing. So if someone suggests that you make changes to your submitted patch, ideally what you should do is to resubmit the patch with the fixes --- and not submit a patch which is a delta to the previous one. This is especially ...
Apr 4, 11:08 am 2010
tytso
Re: fsck more often when powerfail is detected (was Re: ...
So what I recommend for server class machines is to either turn off the automatic fsck's (it's the default, but it's documented and there are supported ways of turning it off --- that's hardly developers "ramming" it down user's throats), or more preferably, to use LVM, and You can do this with ext3/ext4 today, now. Just take a look at e2croncheck in the contrib directory of e2fsprogs. Changing it to not Hmm, why are you running on battery so often? I make a point of running connected to ...
Apr 4, 12:29 pm 2010
tytso
Re: fsck more often when powerfail is detected (was Re: ...
For people using e2croncheck, where you can check it when the system is idle and without needing to do a power cycle, I'd recommend once a Some distributions will allow you to cancel an fsck; either by using ^C, or hitting escape. That's a matter for the boot scripts, which are distribution specific. Ubuntu has a way of doing this, for example, if I recall correctly --- although since I've started using e2croncheck, I've never had an issue with an e2fsck taking place on bootup. Also, ext4, ...
Apr 4, 12:35 pm 2010
tytso
Re: [PATCH 3/3] ext4: symlink must be handled via filesy ...
Added to the ext4 patch queue; I've added a Signed-off-by: for you Dmitry, per your e-mail to Jan Kara. (There seems to be some random confused people who think the Signed-off-by has no legal significance, which is absolutely not true.) - Ted --
Apr 4, 1:05 pm 2010
tytso
Re: [PATCH] ext4_freeze: don't return to userspace with ...
Um, I think the addition of vfs_check_frozen(), esp. to ext4_journal_start_sb() is absolutely necessary. What else do we have to prevent filesystem modifications from going to the file systme layer? I didn't see anything in the VFS layer that checks s_frozen; am I missing something? - Ted --
Apr 4, 1:52 pm 2010
tytso
Re: [PATCH] ext4_freeze: don't return to userspace with ...
Added to the ext4 patch queue, with the following patch comment: ext4: don't return to userspace after freezing the fs with a mutex held ext4_freeze() used jbd2_journal_lock_updates() which takes the j_barrier mutex, and then returns to userspace. The kernel does not like this: ================================================ [ BUG: lock held when returning to user space! ] ------------------------------------------------ lvcreate/1075 is leaving the kernel with locks still held! 1 ...
Apr 4, 2:03 pm 2010
Eric Sandeen
Re: [PATCH] ext4_freeze: don't return to userspace with ...
Well, there is __generic_file_aio_write doing vfs_check_frozen, but I thought there was more at the vfs level to stop things from getting to the filesystem... *shrug* I see you put the patch in as sent, it sounds right to me. Thanks, -Eric --
Apr 4, 2:23 pm 2010
Theodore Tso
Re: [PATCH] ext4_freeze: don't return to userspace with ...
Yeah, it looks safe but it would be nice to do some testing to make sure there's nothing we missed. I'm also vaguely worried whether the right thing will happen in no-journal mode, but it looks like it's better than what we had before (which clearly would have never worked in no journal mode), so I decided to let it pass. Testing the freeze functionality definitely needs to be done before we trust what happens in no journal mode, for sure. -- Ted --
Apr 4, 2:56 pm 2010
previous daytodaynext day
April 3, 2010April 4, 2010April 5, 2010