the same thing. In the patch below
I change inotify do add one to the value was pass into idr. I also
change the comment to more accurately reflect what the function does.
The function name doesn't fit, but it never did.
Signed-off-by:
into idr. I also
change the comment to more accurately reflect what the function does.
The function name doesn't fit, but it never did.
Signed-off-by: John McCutchan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: linux/fs/inotify.c
===
--- linux.orig/fs
be find first, to
> see if it's valid).
Just to clarify, the remove() he is talking about isn't idr_remove, it
is inotify's remove. idr_find() is failing at 1024 which causes
inotify's remove to fail.
--
John McCutchan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 11:54 -0700, George Anzinger wrote:
> Robert Love wrote:
> > On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 09:33 -0400, John McCutchan wrote:
> >
> >>On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 22:07 +1200, Reuben Farrelly wrote:
> >>
> ~
> >>>dovecot: Aug 25 19:3
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 16:41 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 10:13 -0400, John McCutchan wrote:
>
> > I really don't want 2.6.13 to go out with this bug or the compromise. If
> > we use 0, we will have a lot of wd re-use. Which will cause "strange"
&
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 16:13 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 10:06 -0400, John McCutchan wrote:
> > > it fails on 2.6.13-rc6 as soon as the device is full and doesn't hold
> > > any more directories.
>
> Obviously this wasn't true, I was hit
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 09:47 -0400, Robert Love wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 09:40 -0400, John McCutchan wrote:
>
> > I get that message a lot. I know I have said this before (and was wrong)
> > but I think the idr layer is busted.
>
> This time I think I agree with y
ils on 2.6.13-rc6 as soon as the device is full and doesn't hold
> any more directories.
Could you send me the new test program?
--
John McCutchan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 15:50 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 09:40 -0400, John McCutchan wrote:
>
> > On 2.6.13-rc7 the test program fails. It always fails when a wd == 1024.
> > If I skip inotify_rm_watch when wd == 1024, it will fail at wd == 2048.
> >
7, I
added this to inotify.c:359:
if (ret <= dev->last_wd) {
printk(KERN_INFO "idr_get_new_above returned <= dev->last_wd\n");
}
I get that message a lot. I know I have said this before (and was wrong)
but I think the idr layer is busted.
--
John McCutchan <[EMAIL PROT
e and with 2.6.12-rc6-mm(1|2) kernel.
>
> Robert, John, what do you think? Is this possibly related to the oops seen
> in the log that I reported earlier? (Which is still showing up 2-3 times per
> day, btw)
There is definitely something broken here.
--
John McCutchan <[EMA
here.
--
John McCutchan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
) {
printk(KERN_INFO idr_get_new_above returned = dev-last_wd\n);
}
I get that message a lot. I know I have said this before (and was wrong)
but I think the idr layer is busted.
--
John McCutchan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 15:50 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 09:40 -0400, John McCutchan wrote:
On 2.6.13-rc7 the test program fails. It always fails when a wd == 1024.
If I skip inotify_rm_watch when wd == 1024, it will fail at wd == 2048.
It seems the idr layer has
you send me the new test program?
--
John McCutchan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 09:47 -0400, Robert Love wrote:
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 09:40 -0400, John McCutchan wrote:
I get that message a lot. I know I have said this before (and was wrong)
but I think the idr layer is busted.
This time I think I agree with you. ;-)
Let's just pass zero
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 16:13 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 10:06 -0400, John McCutchan wrote:
it fails on 2.6.13-rc6 as soon as the device is full and doesn't hold
any more directories.
Obviously this wasn't true, I was hitting the 8192 watches limit
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 16:41 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 10:13 -0400, John McCutchan wrote:
I really don't want 2.6.13 to go out with this bug or the compromise. If
we use 0, we will have a lot of wd re-use. Which will cause strange
problems in inotify using
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 11:54 -0700, George Anzinger wrote:
Robert Love wrote:
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 09:33 -0400, John McCutchan wrote:
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 22:07 +1200, Reuben Farrelly wrote:
~
dovecot: Aug 25 19:31:26 Warning: IMAP(gilly): removing wd 1022 from
inotify fd 4
dovecot
, it
is inotify's remove. idr_find() is failing at 1024 which causes
inotify's remove to fail.
--
John McCutchan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo
The message from dovecot is allegedly due to dovecot passing in a file
> descriptor which was not obtained from the inotify_init() syscall. But
> until we know what caused those stack dumps we cannot definitely say
> whether dovecot is at fault.
>
Inotify has a check on both add and rm wat
up?
--
John McCutchan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
On Mon, 2005-08-15 at 12:27 -0400, Robert Love wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-08-15 at 10:16 -0400, John McCutchan wrote:
>
> > Inotify is using idr_get_new_above to make sure that the next watch
> > descriptor is larger/different than any of the previous watch
> > de
, that idr_get_new_above always returns the first available id.
This causes a serious problem for inotify, because user space will get a
IGNORE event for a wd K that might refer to the last holder of the K.
--
John McCutchan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe l
, that idr_get_new_above always returns the first available id.
This causes a serious problem for inotify, because user space will get a
IGNORE event for a wd K that might refer to the last holder of the K.
--
John McCutchan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel
On Mon, 2005-08-15 at 12:27 -0400, Robert Love wrote:
On Mon, 2005-08-15 at 10:16 -0400, John McCutchan wrote:
Inotify is using idr_get_new_above to make sure that the next watch
descriptor is larger/different than any of the previous watch
descriptors. We keep track of the largest wd
eem to make
> > changes to
> > xattrs and both are exported as system calls.
>
> We should.
>
Yes we should.
Signed-off-by: John McCtuchan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
John McCutchan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscr
to
xattrs and both are exported as system calls.
We should.
Yes we should.
Signed-off-by: John McCtuchan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
John McCutchan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info
On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 10:25 +1000, Neil Brown wrote:
> On Tuesday June 21, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-06-21 at 12:29 +1000, Neil Brown wrote:
> >
> > > There may well be other good arguments against 'fd's, but I'm trying
> > > to point out that this isn't one of them, and so
On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 10:25 +1000, Neil Brown wrote:
On Tuesday June 21, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2005-06-21 at 12:29 +1000, Neil Brown wrote:
There may well be other good arguments against 'fd's, but I'm trying
to point out that this isn't one of them, and so shouldn't appear
On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 06:06:56PM +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Jul 2005, John McCutchan wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 08:56:15AM +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> > > On Mon, 4 Jul 2005, John McCutchan wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 2005-07-04 at 2
On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 08:56:15AM +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Jul 2005, John McCutchan wrote:
> > On Mon, 2005-07-04 at 20:09 +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> > > On Mon, 4 Jul 2005, Daniel Drake wrote:
> > > > Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> >
On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 08:56:15AM +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2005, John McCutchan wrote:
On Mon, 2005-07-04 at 20:09 +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2005, Daniel Drake wrote:
Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
)-: I have addressed the only things I can
On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 06:06:56PM +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jul 2005, John McCutchan wrote:
On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 08:56:15AM +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2005, John McCutchan wrote:
On Mon, 2005-07-04 at 20:09 +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote
rk, I am going to have a closer look at the patch soon. Could you
post the final patch at http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4796
Thanks,
--
John McCutchan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a messa
the final patch at http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4796
Thanks,
--
John McCutchan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please
rough the rest of function. And
> drop _20_ references to the watch. 9 of those - after we kfree() the
> watch...
In create_watch () we call get_inotify_watch (), which maps to the
put_inotify_watch() in remove_watch(). As far as I can tell the ref
counting is 1 for 1.
--
John McCutchan <[EMAIL
tell the ref
counting is 1 for 1.
--
John McCutchan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org
y spider your way
down the path yourself adding a watch for each directory you encounter.
This is how beagle works, which has the same needs as your problem.
--
John McCutchan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the bo
for each directory you encounter.
This is how beagle works, which has the same needs as your problem.
--
John McCutchan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http
is up for discussion.
I would still like to keep the character device as the interface for
getting the fd. I don't see what benefit could be gained by converting
to a syscall based interface for getting the fd.
--
John McCutchan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: sen
to keep the character device as the interface for
getting the fd. I don't see what benefit could be gained by converting
to a syscall based interface for getting the fd.
--
John McCutchan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body
Hello,
After I mounted my windows partition under 2.4.0-test11pre6
the file system was corrupted.
John
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at
Hello,
After I mounted my windows partition under 2.4.0-test11pre6
the file system was corrupted.
John
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at
44 matches
Mail list logo
