From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id o861G1sp143578 for ; Sun, 5 Sep 2010 20:16:01 -0500 Received: from mail.internode.on.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id EEF7514E6AE1 for ; Sun, 5 Sep 2010 18:27:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.internode.on.net (bld-mail18.adl2.internode.on.net [150.101.137.103]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id GC53U776u0cVDAmR for ; Sun, 05 Sep 2010 18:27:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2010 11:16:40 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: separate project quota from group quota (questions, design issues) Message-ID: <20100906011640.GZ7362@dastard> References: <201009041000.55878.arekm@maven.pl> <20100904233053.GA26586@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100904233053.GA26586@infradead.org> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Sat, Sep 04, 2010 at 07:30:53PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Thanks for doing this work Arek, I think it will be useful for some > users and defintively is cleaners than what we have now. > > > I started doing that by splitting every group+project handling code into > > separate group and project one. Added superblock field for project quota. New > > feature flag (SEPARATEPQUOTA). > > Ok. > > > If old filesystem (for SEPARATEQUOTA) is mounted then I'll simply load > > sb_gquotino into mp->m_sb.sb_pquotino which I think is enough to handle old fs > > (since new kernel operates on separate structures for project quota). > > Do you mean an old filesystem without the SEPARATEQUOTA bit set here? > > > New filesystem (without quota inodes allocated yet), when mounted, gets new > > quota inode allocated for project quota and SEPARATEQUOTA feature bit set. > > I think we need the SEPARATEQUOTA bit set explicitly by > mkfs.xfs/xfs_admin. But once we start using project quotas with the > bit set the above sounds fine. Agreed - we can't set the bit by default until the kernel has suppoerted the feature for some time. A user who upgrades from a kernel that doesn't support separate quotas can't downgrade if the bit is automatically set if there are problems (and the problems requiring downgrade might be completely unrelated to XFS). Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs