Any chance you can remove linux-fsdevel from the CC list? I don't think this
has anything to do with filesystems.
Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Principal Software Engineer
Cluster File Systems, Inc.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a m
Hi Zach,
One of our perf. team ran into this while doing some runs.
I didn't see anything obvious - it looks like we converted
async IO to synchronous one. I didn't spend much time digging
around.
Is this a known issue ? Any ideas ?
Thanks,
Badari
[ cut here ]
kernel BU
On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 08:35:48AM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 07:50:56AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > Lets look at a typical example of how IO actually gets done today,
> > starting with sys_write():
> >
> > sys_write(file, buffer, 1MB)
> > for each page:
> > prepar
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 18:15:55 -0400
Trond Myklebust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-05-29 at 12:47 -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > I've been looking at issue of clearing setuid/setgid bits when a file
> > is written to on NFS. Here's the problem in a nutshell:
> >
> > We have 2 users. test
On Thu, 2007-06-28 at 10:39 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
>
>
> I don't think it does - swapfile I/O looks like it goes direct to
> bio without passing through the filesystem. When the swapfile is
> mapped, it scans and records the extent map of the entire swapfile
> in a separate structure and AF
On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 09:28:36AM +1000, Nathan Scott wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-06-27 at 23:36 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> > Allows setup_swap_extents() to use preallocated files on XFS
> > filesystems for swap files without ever needing to convert them.
>
> Using unwritten extents (as opposed
From: Casey Schaufler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 17:27:17 -0700 (PDT)
> --- David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Neither of those are reasons why something should go into the tree.
>
> They reflect the corporate reality of the open source community.
> If you're going to
--- David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Crispin Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 15:46:57 -0700
>
> > But we do not want to prevent other people from using SELinux if it
> > suits them. Linux is about choice, and that is especially vital in
> > security. As Linus hi
On Wed, 2007-06-27 at 23:36 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> Allows setup_swap_extents() to use preallocated files on XFS
> filesystems for swap files without ever needing to convert them.
Using unwritten extents (as opposed to the MKSWAP flag mentioned
earlier) has the unfortunate down side of
From: Crispin Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 15:46:57 -0700
> But we do not want to prevent other people from using SELinux if it
> suits them. Linux is about choice, and that is especially vital in
> security. As Linus himself observed when LSM was started, there are a
> lot of
Sean wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 14:06:04 -0700
> Crispin Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I am hoping for a reconciliation where the people who don't like
>> AppArmor live with it by not using it. AppArmor is not intended to
>> replace SELinux, it is intended to address a different set of
On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 07:50:56AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 07:32:45AM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 08:34:49AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 07:23:09PM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 01:55:11P
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 14:06:04 -0700
Crispin Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am hoping for a reconciliation where the people who don't like
> AppArmor live with it by not using it. AppArmor is not intended to
> replace SELinux, it is intended to address a different set of goals.
You keep sayin
Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 07:47:00PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
>> Do you agree with the "irreconcilable" part? I think I do.
I am hoping for a reconciliation where the people who don't like
AppArmor live with it by not using it. AppArmor is not intended to
replace SELinu
On Wednesday 27 June 2007 01:46, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-06-26 at 16:15 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > To remove conditionally passing of vfsmounts to the LSM, a nameidata
> > struct can be instantiated in the nfsd and mqueue filesystems. This
> > however results in useless info
On 27 Jun 2007, at 12:50, Chris Mason wrote:
On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 07:32:45AM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote:
On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 08:34:49AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 07:23:09PM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 01:55:11PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
[
On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 07:47:00PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 19:24:03 -0700 John Johansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > >
> > > so... where do we stand with this? Fundamental, irreconcilable
> > > differences over the use of pathname-based security?
> > >
> > There c
On Wednesday 27 June 2007 12:58, Kyle Moffett wrote:
> I seem to recall you could actually end up racing and building a path
> to the file in those directories as "a/d/0/3" or some other path at
> which it never even remotely existed. I'd love to be wrong,
Cheer up, you recall wrong.
> but I can'
On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 11:49:15PM -0400, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Jun 27, 2007 09:14 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> > Someone on the XFs list had an interesting request - preallocated
> > swap files. You can't use unwritten extents for this because
> > of sys_swapon()s use of bmap() (XFS returns
On Jun 26, 2007, at 07:14:14, Nick Piggin wrote:
On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 07:23:09PM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
Can we call it a block mapping layer or something like that? e.g.
struct blkmap?
I'm not fixed on fsblock, but blkmap doesn't grab me either. It is
a map from the pagecache to the
On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 07:32:45AM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 08:34:49AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 07:23:09PM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 01:55:11PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> >
> > [ ... fsblocks vs extent range m
On Jun 26, 2007, at 22:24:03, John Johansen wrote:
other issues that have been raised are:
- the use of d_path to generate the pathname used for mediation when a
file is opened.
- Generating the pathname using a reverse walk is considered ugly
A little more than "ugly". In this basic concu
22 matches
Mail list logo
