All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Mitsuo Hayasaka <mitsuo.hayasaka.hu@hitachi.com>
Cc: Alex Elder <aelder@sgi.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com,
	xfs-masters@oss.sgi.com, Ben Myers <bpm@sgi.com>,
	yrl.pp-manager.tt@hitachi.com, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] xfs: change available ranges in quota check
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 12:46:12 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120124174612.GC9853@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120123034513.3339.97432.stgit@ltc219.sdl.hitachi.co.jp>

On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 12:45:14PM +0900, Mitsuo Hayasaka wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> This patch series changes available ranges of softlimit and
> hardlimit in quota check, as follows.
> 
> (1) Consider new reservation for quota check
>     The disk block reservation checks if (current usage + new
>     reservation) reach the quota limit although the inode reservation
>     does not use the new reservation for quota check. It should
>     consider it, as well. This is mandatory for (2).

Can you send a testcase that reproduces issues with the old behaviour?

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Mitsuo Hayasaka <mitsuo.hayasaka.hu@hitachi.com>
Cc: Ben Myers <bpm@sgi.com>, Alex Elder <aelder@sgi.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	xfs-masters@oss.sgi.com, yrl.pp-manager.tt@hitachi.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] xfs: change available ranges in quota check
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 12:46:12 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120124174612.GC9853@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120123034513.3339.97432.stgit@ltc219.sdl.hitachi.co.jp>

On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 12:45:14PM +0900, Mitsuo Hayasaka wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> This patch series changes available ranges of softlimit and
> hardlimit in quota check, as follows.
> 
> (1) Consider new reservation for quota check
>     The disk block reservation checks if (current usage + new
>     reservation) reach the quota limit although the inode reservation
>     does not use the new reservation for quota check. It should
>     consider it, as well. This is mandatory for (2).

Can you send a testcase that reproduces issues with the old behaviour?


  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-01-24 17:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-01-23  3:45 [PATCH 0/3] xfs: change available ranges in quota check Mitsuo Hayasaka
2012-01-23  3:45 ` Mitsuo Hayasaka
2012-01-23  3:45 ` [PATCH 1/3] xfs: consider new reservation for quota check on inode reservation Mitsuo Hayasaka
2012-01-23  3:45   ` Mitsuo Hayasaka
2012-01-23  3:45 ` [PATCH 2/3] xfs: change available ranges of softlimit and hardlimit in quota check Mitsuo Hayasaka
2012-01-23  3:45   ` Mitsuo Hayasaka
2012-01-23  3:45 ` [PATCH 3/3] xfs: cleanup quota check on disk blocks and inodes reservations Mitsuo Hayasaka
2012-01-23  3:45   ` Mitsuo Hayasaka
2012-02-02 16:07   ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-02-02 16:07     ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-02-03  4:05     ` HAYASAKA Mitsuo
2012-02-03  4:05       ` HAYASAKA Mitsuo
2012-01-24 17:46 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2012-01-24 17:46   ` [PATCH 0/3] xfs: change available ranges in quota check Christoph Hellwig
2012-01-27  6:21   ` HAYASAKA Mitsuo
2012-01-27  6:21     ` HAYASAKA Mitsuo
2012-01-27 11:02     ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-01-27 11:02       ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-01-27 14:02       ` HAYASAKA Mitsuo
2012-01-27 14:02         ` HAYASAKA Mitsuo
2012-01-27 14:04         ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-01-27 14:04           ` Christoph Hellwig

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20120124174612.GC9853@infradead.org \
    --to=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=aelder@sgi.com \
    --cc=bpm@sgi.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mitsuo.hayasaka.hu@hitachi.com \
    --cc=xfs-masters@oss.sgi.com \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    --cc=yrl.pp-manager.tt@hitachi.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.