anyone port data-logging patches to -rc3?

anyone port data-logging patches to -rc3?

[Tom Vier]

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)

-- 
Tom Vier <tmv@comcast.net>
DSA Key ID 0xE6CB97DA

Re: anyone port data-logging patches to -rc3?

[Oleg Drokin]

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

Re: anyone port data-logging patches to -rc3?

[Chris Mason]

On Fri, 2003-05-23 at 05:46, Oleg Drokin wrote:
> 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).
> 

Thanks Oleg, I'm integrating all of this today.

> 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.

Will do.

> 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?

They'd get the same error, just sooner.  I'm more inclined to fix things
so that data=ordered works with O_DIRECT, lets see what I can come up
with.

> 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?

Jeff Mahoney managed to trigger a race by switching between data=journal
and the other modes.  All we really need to do is be able to switch data
mode when remounting from readonly to rw (as in for the root FS), so
I'll limit the remounting code to that.

-chris

Re: anyone port data-logging patches to -rc3?

[Oleg Drokin]

Hello!

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 08:28:19AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:

> > 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?
> They'd get the same error, just sooner.  I'm more inclined to fix things

Yes, they'd get it at open() time which is much better, I think.

> so that data=ordered works with O_DIRECT, lets see what I can come up
> with.

Still there is no chance for that to work in data=journal mode.

> > 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?
> Jeff Mahoney managed to trigger a race by switching between data=journal
> and the other modes.  All we really need to do is be able to switch data
> mode when remounting from readonly to rw (as in for the root FS), so
> I'll limit the remounting code to that.

Any chance you would also rework journaling code a bit, so that it does not occupy
ram for various tables/lists when the fs is in R/O mode?

Bye,
    Oleg

Re: anyone port data-logging patches to -rc3?

[Chris Mason]

On Fri, 2003-05-23 at 08:36, Oleg Drokin wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 08:28:19AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> 
> > > 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?
> > They'd get the same error, just sooner.  I'm more inclined to fix things
> 
> Yes, they'd get it at open() time which is much better, I think.
> 
> > so that data=ordered works with O_DIRECT, lets see what I can come up
> > with.
> 
> Still there is no chance for that to work in data=journal mode.
> 

Right, we can null out the func pointer when we change to data=journal
mode.

> > > 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?
> > Jeff Mahoney managed to trigger a race by switching between data=journal
> > and the other modes.  All we really need to do is be able to switch data
> > mode when remounting from readonly to rw (as in for the root FS), so
> > I'll limit the remounting code to that.
> 
> Any chance you would also rework journaling code a bit, so that it does not occupy
> ram for various tables/lists when the fs is in R/O mode?

I think I would rather do that in 2.5.x first, perhaps along with some
changes to more dynamic tables/lists for the journal memory structures. 
The data logging code started that process, but I'd like to keep the
2.4.x data logging changes smallish right now so we can get it all
submitted.

Aside from that raid remount bug, do you see major problems with keeping
the memory around in readonly mode?

-chris

Re: anyone port data-logging patches to -rc3?

[Oleg Drokin]

Hello!

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 08:44:51AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > > > 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?
> > > Jeff Mahoney managed to trigger a race by switching between data=journal
> > > and the other modes.  All we really need to do is be able to switch data
> > > mode when remounting from readonly to rw (as in for the root FS), so
> > > I'll limit the remounting code to that.
> > Any chance you would also rework journaling code a bit, so that it does not occupy
> > ram for various tables/lists when the fs is in R/O mode?
> I think I would rather do that in 2.5.x first, perhaps along with some
> changes to more dynamic tables/lists for the journal memory structures. 
> The data logging code started that process, but I'd like to keep the
> 2.4.x data logging changes smallish right now so we can get it all
> submitted.

This is ok with me.

> Aside from that raid remount bug, do you see major problems with keeping
> the memory around in readonly mode?

Not major, but it allocates
(bmap_nr * sizeof(struct reiserfs_bitmap_node *) + SB_ONDISK_JOURNAL_SIZE(p_s_sb) * 2 * sizeof(struct reiserfs_journal_cnode)) bytes
of ram that is never used.
This is kind of pity, esp. on small-ram boxes.

Bye,
    Oleg

Re: anyone port data-logging patches to -rc3?

[Philippe Gramoullé]

Hello Oleg,

On Fri, 23 May 2003 13:46:33 +0400
Oleg Drokin <green@namesys.com> wrote:

  | Ok, replacement patches are in
  | ftp://ftp.namesys.com/pub/reiserfs-for-2.4/testing/data-logging-and-quota-2.4.21-rc3/
  | 

Patches apply fine but i have compile errors after applying the quota patches for 2.4.21-rc3 starting after 07...

Says: can't find files

<linux/dqblk_xfs.h>
<linux/dqblk_v1.h>
<linux/dqblk_v2.h>

Everything is fine with -rc2 patches except that it doesn't compile because of the rtnetlink_rcv_skb
unresolved symbol with gcc-3.3 which is fixed in -rc3. :)


Thanks,

Philippe

-- 

Philippe Gramoullé
philippe.gramoulle@mmania.com
Lycos Europe - NOC France

Re: anyone port data-logging patches to -rc3?

[Oleg Drokin]

Hello!

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 06:15:04PM +0200, Philippe Gramoull? wrote:
>   | Ok, replacement patches are in
>   | ftp://ftp.namesys.com/pub/reiserfs-for-2.4/testing/data-logging-and-quota-2.4.21-rc3/
>   | 
> Patches apply fine but i have compile errors after applying the quota patches for 2.4.21-rc3 starting after 07...
> Says: can't find files
> 
> <linux/dqblk_xfs.h>
> <linux/dqblk_v1.h>
> <linux/dqblk_v2.h>

Ah, stupid me.
I see.
Ok, then apply Chris' version of 07-... patch and then apply
07-quota_nospace_fix.diff.gz patch from our ftp that I just put there on top of it.

Bye,
    Oleg