From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ted Ts'o Subject: Re: Bigalloc ENOSPC woes Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 17:31:11 -0500 Message-ID: <20120130223111.GA20940@thunk.org> References: <4F270949.30800@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: ext4 development To: Eric Sandeen Return-path: Received: from li9-11.members.linode.com ([67.18.176.11]:40016 "EHLO test.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752554Ab2A3WbP (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jan 2012 17:31:15 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4F270949.30800@redhat.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 03:19:05PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > I got nervous when I tried this on an -O bigalloc -C 65536 fs: > > # echo foo > blah; du -hc blah; sync; du -hc blah > 4.0K blah > 4.0K total > 64K blah > 64K total > > Seems that du should never report less than the cluster size, should it? Yes, that seems like a bug. > And that made me wonder about ENOSPC handling - are we tracing > delalloc allocations correctly? > > From running xfstest 204 on a similarly-created fs, it really seems > that we are not.... > > Ted, are you aware of those issues in bigalloc? No, this is news to me. I'll have to take a closer look at this; thanks for bring this up. - Ted