From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Oleg Drokin Subject: Re: anyone port data-logging patches to -rc3? Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 13:46:33 +0400 Message-ID: <20030523094633.GA1005@namesys.com> References: <20030523003033.GC6586@zero> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030523003033.GC6586@zero> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Tom Vier Cc: reiserfs-list@namesys.com, mason@suse.com Hello! On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 08:30:33PM -0400, Tom Vier wrote: > i started to, but the change in reiserfs/inode.c:reiserfs_truncate_file() is > more than i want to play w/ (my first time looking at reiserfs code). i > don't want to trash my fs. 8) Ok, replacement patches are in ftp://ftp.namesys.com/pub/reiserfs-for-2.4/testing/data-logging-and-quota-2.4.21-rc3/ I tested it in all journaling modes and found zero problems. (have not tried crashing it, though). Chris: I optimized reiserfs_truncate_file() a bit so that it won't do kmap() on the same page twice. Also I think I did correct thing with reiserfs_commit_for_tail/reiserfs_commit_for_inode stuff, but I want you to take a look anyway. And BTW, I think this "do O_DIRECT stuff on ordered/datalogging fs, receive error from write(2)" is counter-intuitive. what do you think about just only setting reiserfs_address_space_operations->direct_IO to non-NULL in case of writeback mount? Also probably we do not want to allow remounting with different data-logging mode, may be we should even add a check in reiserfs_remount() and spit out an error in such a case? Bye, Oleg