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 F344F7F3F for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 15:40:12 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC6C2304032 for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 13:40:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net (ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net [150.101.137.129]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id weBA1Blyzj8AGa32 for ; Wed, 05 Mar 2014 13:40:08 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 08:40:02 +1100 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] xfs: inode log reservations are still too small Message-ID: <20140305214002.GI6851@dastard> References: <1393981893-2497-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1393981893-2497-3-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <20140305171441.GD11667@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140305171441.GD11667@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 Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 09:14:41AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > The fix looks correct, but care to remind me where we account for the > xlog_op_header for all non-buf, non-inode transaction? We don't. We need to, I just haven't had the time to audit the rest of the reservations to fix them all up yet. AFAIA, only the quota off transactions don't have any slack in them for xlog_op_header space - all the others that are incorrect probably have enough overhead from the buffer overhead roundup to cover the lack ophdr accounting on things like dquots. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs