Re: [RFC PATCH] xfs: account for per-AG reservation in statfs f_blocks

["Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>]

On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 08:42:50AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 01, 2017 at 02:16:42PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > From: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
> > 
> > Since the blocks reserved by the per-AG reservation mechanism are never
> > available to userspace, there's no point in reporting them via statfs.
> > Reduce the number of blocks reported by statfs so our space accounting
> > works the way it did in the old days -- f_blocks is the theoretical
> > upper bound on the amount of space that user programs could allocate,
> > and f_blocks is the current maximum.
> > 
> > This eliminates the regression where you format a 100T XFS and df
> > reports 2T are already "used".  Now it reports that you have a 98T
> > filesystem.
> > 
> > (Dave's thinp rfc might very well fix this whole problem; this is
> > purely a bandaid to shut down the complaints.)
> 
> Yes, it does. These two patches from the series can stand alone,
> though I've renamed the variables I used as a result of discussion
> with Brian and Amir. If you want to take these instead, I'll post my
> updated patches for you:
> 
> https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-xfs/msg12211.html
> https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-xfs/msg12215.html

Sure, please send along whatever the latest version looks like.

m_LBA_size -> m_total_size -> m_fs_addr_space etc. :)

FWIW I already took the patch that converts the remaining hasFOO
helper functions.

--D

> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Dave.
> -- 
> Dave Chinner
> david@fromorbit.com
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html