From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sunil Mushran Date: Thu Mar 29 09:41:35 2007 Subject: [Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH 0/3] Properly protect the extent map In-Reply-To: <460B7B00.30004@ubuntu.com> References: <20070329005041.518030000@oracle.com> <460B7B00.30004@ubuntu.com> Message-ID: <460BEC3A.2050009@oracle.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com Thanks Fabbio. Yes, we'll schedule the test on the big cluster after the 1.2.5 release run. Next week, I hope. Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote: > Joel Becker wrote: > >> The extent map code was seeing an error trip when inserting records. >> There is a sanity check ensuring that the new record is within the known >> size of the file - as known by the extent map. The problem was that the >> "known" size was smaller than expected, returning an error to the caller. >> >> This is a lot easier to see in local mounts. It has only been rarely seen >> in clusters. >> >> We have three "independant" problems. >> >> 1) We don't take ip_alloc_sem when touching directory allocations. >> 2) We don't lock em_clusters properly. >> 3) Local mounts race to ocfs2_extent_map_trunc() in ocfs2_meta_lock_update(). >> >> The patches that follow are against mainline. They have been tested >> against 1.2 with local mounts. >> >> Patches (1) and (2) will be ported to the ocfs2 1.2 branch directly, >> and all three fixes will be pushed to mainline. >> >> Joel >> > > add a > > Signed-off-by: Fabio M. Di Nitto > > on all 3 of them. They fix the problem as i reported it, but it looks like they > introduce a performance hit. Somebody other than me should test it too. > > Fabio > >