public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: HAYASAKA Mitsuo <mitsuo.hayasaka.hu@hitachi.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	xfs-masters@oss.sgi.com, Ben Myers <bpm@sgi.com>,
	Alex Elder <aelder@sgi.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] xfs: change available ranges in quota check
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 06:02:38 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120127110238.GB31093@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F22424E.8070407@hitachi.com>

On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 03:21:02PM +0900, HAYASAKA Mitsuo wrote:
> > Can you send a testcase that reproduces issues with the old behaviour?
> > 
> 
> Regarding (1) related to inode reservation, current xfs works well
> because inode is reserved one by one if required.
> 
> For example, when an new inode tries to be reserved in xfs_trans_dqresv(),
> it checks quota as follows.

I'm just curious what the intent behdind the patches was.  They look
good to me, but I wonder why we need to change it at all.

> To make it more general, this check should be the same way as the new
> block quota check introduced in the PATCH 2/3 where the disk block can
> be used up to the block quota limits.

So I guess that's the part we'd want a test case for if possible.

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

  reply	other threads:[~2012-01-27 11:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-01-23  3:45 [PATCH 0/3] xfs: change available ranges in quota check Mitsuo Hayasaka
2012-01-23  3:45 ` [PATCH 1/3] xfs: consider new reservation for quota check on inode reservation Mitsuo Hayasaka
2012-01-23  3:45 ` [PATCH 2/3] xfs: change available ranges of softlimit and hardlimit in quota check Mitsuo Hayasaka
2012-01-23  3:45 ` [PATCH 3/3] xfs: cleanup quota check on disk blocks and inodes reservations Mitsuo Hayasaka
2012-02-02 16:07   ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-02-03  4:05     ` HAYASAKA Mitsuo
2012-01-24 17:46 ` [PATCH 0/3] xfs: change available ranges in quota check Christoph Hellwig
2012-01-27  6:21   ` HAYASAKA Mitsuo
2012-01-27 11:02     ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2012-01-27 14:02       ` HAYASAKA Mitsuo
2012-01-27 14:04         ` Christoph Hellwig

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=20120127110238.GB31093@infradead.org \
    --to=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=aelder@sgi.com \
    --cc=bpm@sgi.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mitsuo.hayasaka.hu@hitachi.com \
    --cc=xfs-masters@oss.sgi.com \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    /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