From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dmitry Monakhov Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ext4: Clear the EXT4_EOFBLOCKS_FL flag only when warranted Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 17:12:36 +0400 Message-ID: <87fx1gktvf.fsf@openvz.org> References: <20100525041737.GB5556@thunk.org> <1274761117-26560-2-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <87zkzola0r.fsf@openvz.org> <20100525130331.GC5556@thunk.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Ext4 Developers List To: tytso@mit.edu Return-path: Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.158]:43801 "EHLO fg-out-1718.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754302Ab0EYNMn (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 May 2010 09:12:43 -0400 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id d23so2324490fga.1 for ; Tue, 25 May 2010 06:12:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20100525130331.GC5556@thunk.org> (tytso@mit.edu's message of "Tue, 25 May 2010 09:03:31 -0400") Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: tytso@mit.edu writes: > On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 11:23:48AM +0400, Dmitry Monakhov wrote: >> This condition was triggered during fsstress test. So I consider >> it as rare but possible in real life. Nor than less it is better >> to fix it now, than fix it in response from a midnight call from some >> crazy customer :) > > Fair enough, I just didn't have an 8-core system handy when I was > dealing with it, so hand-crafted an fs image. > > BTW, whatever happened to the xfstests patch that you created in > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15792 > > Did you submit it to the xfstests folks for inclusion? Yes but changes was requested, so i've prepared new version. I'll post it against Jan's xfsqa quota branch.