First, Mr. Theodore Ts'o, your reply is a great honor to me. And I learn more about ext4 and its maintainers and developers, specially that testing is important to ext4. Thanks. In my view, one of the important parts of a patch is that the patcher is really concerning what is patched, another is whether the questions listed in the patch do exist, and whether the solution, if provided by the patcher, is correct. Even if the provide solution is ok, I think, it is the ...

I accept what you decided, Mr. Theodore Ts'o. And I want to learn a little about the score on the patchwork web site, so please guide me to it if you like. Thank you all, great maintainers and developers of GNU Linux, for reviewing the patch I delivered. - zj --

I have to admit I'm really surprised (almost suspicious) about those results :). If I consider the length of the whole write path doing block allocation and how tiny part of the window you have to squeeze into, it's hard for me to believe that you can achive such huge improvement. So if Quota uses the same approach for fs-private data as VFS uses for inodes - i.e., a filesystem can provide quota allocation and destruction functions that allocate it's private quota structure which contains also ...

This is a problem right there. Remember that there could be multiple file systems mounted so a static variable is fundamentally flawed. In fact, we could have a one filesystem which has more than 3 times the number of groups as another file system. I'll leave it as an exercise to a reader why your patch would be fundamentally flawed in that case. The other thing to note is that this case only gets hit if the file system is so full that we need to empty preallocations. So this ...

https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14830 --- Comment #26 from Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> 2010-04-06 16:47:54 --- Created an attachment (id=25882) --> (https://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=25882) Patch to stop background writeback when other IO is in progress -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching the assignee of the bug. --

https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14830 --- Comment #27 from Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> 2010-04-06 16:52:28 --- Jan, will do after lunch. Thanks for looking into this! -Eric -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching the assignee of the bug. --

https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14830 --- Comment #29 from Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> 2010-04-06 22:59:27 --- A quick test on ext3 looks good; ext4 still seems to run away on sync :( But I need to be a bit more methodical, and test a few more filesystems; will let you know. I'm not familiar enough with all the new writeback code; does this mean that a sync will return as soon as any new IO is queued post-sync? That seems odd if so - but maybe I ...