On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 08:02:37AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > reiserfs: > commit de14569f94513279e3d44d9571a421e9da1759ae > [PATCH] resierfs: avoid tail packing if an inode was ever mmapped > backport to 2.6.16 required
Which would explain the "notail" I've been careful to cargo-cult into every mount string since I started at this job, even though we're storing mainly very small files. Referring back to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (which went to reiserfs-dev and a couple of the ever-growing CC list above) we're still not 100% sure if it's safe to remove the patch that I attached there: >>>>--- file.c~ 2004-10-02 12:29:33.223660850 +0400 >>>>+++ file.c 2004-10-08 10:03:03.001561661 +0400 >>>>@@ -1137,6 +1137,8 @@ >>>>return result; >>>> } >>>> >>>>+ return generic_file_write(file, buf, count, ppos); >>>>+ >>>> if ( unlikely((ssize_t) count < 0 )) >>>> return -EINVAL; which Hans asserted was about 5% slower than the resierfs custom write implementation, but we countered at least meant that we didn't crash in a steaming pile of processes stuck in D state with no way out every few days. It doesn't apply against 2.6.19 any more, which may be a good sign. I haven't seen anything in the changelogs that jumped out at me as the fix though. Regards, Bron. - 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/