From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id q0OHkZCv059278 for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 11:46:35 -0600 Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 12:46:12 -0500 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] xfs: change available ranges in quota check Message-ID: <20120124174612.GC9853@infradead.org> References: <20120123034513.3339.97432.stgit@ltc219.sdl.hitachi.co.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120123034513.3339.97432.stgit@ltc219.sdl.hitachi.co.jp> 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: Mitsuo Hayasaka Cc: Alex Elder , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com, xfs-masters@oss.sgi.com, Ben Myers , yrl.pp-manager.tt@hitachi.com, Christoph Hellwig On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 12:45:14PM +0900, Mitsuo Hayasaka wrote: > Hi, > > This patch series changes available ranges of softlimit and > hardlimit in quota check, as follows. > > (1) Consider new reservation for quota check > The disk block reservation checks if (current usage + new > reservation) reach the quota limit although the inode reservation > does not use the new reservation for quota check. It should > consider it, as well. This is mandatory for (2). Can you send a testcase that reproduces issues with the old behaviour? _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs