linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: Updated ext4 quota design document
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 16:20:47 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100622142047.GF3338@quack.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1OQg7e-0001mI-AB@closure.thunk.org>

  Hi,

On Mon 21-06-10 08:29:06, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> I've created an updated quota design document here:
> 
> https://ext4.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Design_For_1st_Class_Quota_in_Ext4
> 
> No major changes from last time.
> 
> One new thing is a proposed (optional) change to the quota format,
> to use the 32-bit dqpb_pad field in the v2r1 on-disk quota structure as
> a 32-bit CRC of the quota entry.  This would allow the quota system to
> detect corrupted quota entries.  Jan, what do you think?
  It might be reasonable to checksum dquots so that we get closer to
all-metadata-are-checksummed state. I'm just thinking whether checksumming
each dquot is so useful. For example OCFS2 checksums each quota block. That
has an advantage that also quota file tree blocks and headers are
protected. Also it's possible to use the generic block checksumming
framework in JBD2 for this case. OTOH ext4 seems to have chosen to checksum
each group descriptor individually so checksumming each dquot structure
would seem more consistent.
  So I don't have a strong opinion which checksumming scheme should be
chosen. I just wanted to point out that there's another reasonable option.
Generic quota code can easily handle both (including leaving some bytes at
the end of each block for checksums as it does for OCFS2 now).

									Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR

  reply	other threads:[~2010-06-22 14:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-06-21 12:29 Updated ext4 quota design document Theodore Ts'o
2010-06-22 14:20 ` Jan Kara [this message]
2010-06-22 20:08   ` tytso
2010-06-22 20:29     ` Jan Kara
2010-06-22 21:52       ` tytso
2010-06-23 12:30         ` Jan Kara
2010-07-02  7:41         ` Dmitry Monakhov

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=20100622142047.GF3338@quack.suse.cz \
    --to=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).