From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 187108166 for ; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 02:18:26 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by relay1.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08B488F8035 for ; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 00:18:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from emea01-am1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-am1lp0018.outbound.protection.outlook.com [213.199.154.18]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id h4MrrohDHhh8Ha5Y (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 00:18:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51E8E834.6080509@zynstra.com> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 08:18:12 +0100 From: James Dingwall MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Cleancache support in XFS References: <51810CED.4080003@zynstra.com> <20130501162044.GN29359@sgi.com> <20130501223022.GQ10481@dastard> <518222D3.3080109@zynstra.com> <20130522192834.GD10617@phenom.dumpdata.com> <519F1708.10603@zynstra.com> <20130607170826.GA6925@phenom.dumpdata.com> In-Reply-To: <20130607170826.GA6925@phenom.dumpdata.com> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Cc: Ben Myers , xfs@oss.sgi.com Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 08:30:16AM +0100, James Dingwall wrote: >> Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: >>> On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 09:24:51AM +0100, James Dingwall wrote: >>>> Dave Chinner wrote: >>>>> On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 11:20:44AM -0500, Ben Myers wrote: >>>>>> Hi James, >>> Hey folks, >>> I am walking through my vacation-emails-mbox. >>> >>>>>> On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 01:39:09PM +0100, James Dingwall wrote: >>>>>>> In reference to: http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2012-05/msg00046.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> $ grep -r cleancache fs/xfs >>>>>>> on the 3.9 kernel source suggests that no patch was submitted to >>>>>>> enable cleancache for the XFS filesystem. Since it was suggested >>>>>>> that this could be a one liner I've had a go and my first effort is >>>>>>> inline below. While this seems to compile OK I have no experience >>>>>>> in filesystems so I would appreciate it if anyone can point out that >>>>>>> it is obviously wrong and likely to eat my data before I try booting >>>>>>> the kernel. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If it seems a reasonable attempt what would be the best way to check >>>>>>> that it isn't doing nasty things? >>>>>> Hrm.. Looks like there is a doc in Documentation/vm/cleancache.txt which >>>>>> includes a list of attributes the filesystem needs to have to work properly >>>>>> with cleancache. >>>>> So, those points are: >>>> I had started to look at these too but I feel very out of my depth! >>>> I had similar conclusions to what Dave wrote but I don't think my >>>> thoughts should carry very much (any) weight. Anyway I gambled and >>>> booted my xen domU with this patch and so far so good... xen top >>>> shows that tmem is now being used where previously it wasn't. I'll >>>> try running the xfstests at the weekend after a couple more days up >>>> time to see what happens. >>> And how did it go? >> I am running the patch I created on 3.9.3 on half of my xen guests >> now and have not noticed any stability or filesystem problems. xl >> top with 'T' shows that the guests running with it are using >> ephemeral pages were those without do not. I did do some runs with >> xfstests which had some failures but they were present with and >> without the patch. The best I can really offer is that it works for >> me, ymmv. The patch is available as commit >> c725011c4fc5d47e12d131f61bd91a58a40036b5 in >> https://github.com/JKDingwall/linux.git xfs-enable-cleancache or in >> the first message of this thread. > Hey James, > > I've run this patch on my local tree and it looks to work right. I am > saying "looks" as I am hitting some other issue that I believe are > unralted to the patch - but I need to figure them out before I can > comfortably say: "Yes, this looks right and works for me as well." > > Stay tuned. Just to add that I have also had no observable problems running this patch on 3.10.0 or 3.10.1. Regards, James _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs