From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay2.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.29]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E30E29DF8 for ; Tue, 21 May 2013 16:27:30 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DF5F304032 for ; Tue, 21 May 2013 14:27:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ipmail04.adl6.internode.on.net (ipmail04.adl6.internode.on.net [150.101.137.141]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 8kdztrnsqSaePWPI for ; Tue, 21 May 2013 14:27:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 07:27:19 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/11] xfs: fixes for 3.10-rc3 Message-ID: <20130521212719.GQ24543@dastard> References: <1369123330-9579-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <20130521162647.GD19505@sgi.com> <20130521202445.GO24543@dastard> <20130521205249.GL20028@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130521205249.GL20028@sgi.com> 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 Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Ben Myers Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 03:52:49PM -0500, Ben Myers wrote: > Hey, > > On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 06:24:45AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 11:26:47AM -0500, Ben Myers wrote: > > > Hi Dave, > > > > > > On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 06:01:59PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > > This is my current kernel bug fix patch series. I've updated it > > > > against a current xfsdev tree, and contains all the fixes mentioned > > > > in the "fixes for 3.10-rc2 (updated)" thread. The first 7 patches > > > > are patches from that series. The last 4 are new patches. > > > > > > > > The first new patch stops CRC enabled filesystems from spamming the > > > > log. It currently emits an "Experimental" warning ever time the > > > > superblock is written, which is typically every 30s. > > > > > > > > The second path ("rework remote attr CRCs") is the changes I > > > > mentioned in the "fixes for 3.10-rc2 (updated)" thread. The code is > > > > far more robust as a result of these changes, and I think we really > > > > need to change the format as done in this patch. Once we have > > > > decided on the way forward, I'll port this to userspace. > > > > > > > > The third patch fixes a remote symlink problem - I didn't hit this > > > > until I'd redone the remote attr CRCs and the 1k block size > > > > filesystem testing made it passed the attribute tests it was failing > > > > on. > > > > > > > > Finally, the last patch is another on-disk format change - one that > > > > removes the 25 entry limit on ACLs. It doesn't invalidate anything > > > > that is already on disk, just allows ACLs on v5 superblock > > > > filesystems to store more than 25 ACLs in an xattr. In fact, it > > > > allows (65536 - 4) / 12 = 5461 entries to be stored in a single > > > > ACL, so I don't see anyone running out on v5 superblocks.... > > > > > > > > Thoughts, comments? > > > > > > I'll look into these but I am concerned that we're starting to get into 3.11 > > > territory. > > > > The moment we release the first kernel with the format in it, we > > need to use feature bits for on-disk format changes, experimental > > tag or not. Hence IMO this needs to be fixed before an initial > > release. > > There's plenty of bits to go around. ;) Sure, but it's unnecessary complexity. > > It's not a huge change from a code perspective, and it's a lot more > > reliable in my testing.... > > I'm just a bit leery of a redesign at this late juncture. We always seem to > get into trouble at the last minute... Another option is to revert just the > xattr crc support and slap it back in once it has stablized after the release, > but we need to flip a bit for that too... Anyway, I need to look your proposed > code to see what's what. > > Seems like xattrs might be one area where we could use some work in xfstests? Not really - it's getting the xfstests xattr tests to pass that have lead to this. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs