On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 06:46:08PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> Looks good to me. BTW also ext4 (with BIGALLOC feature) and OCFS2 can have
> block allocation unit (called cluster) larger than page size. However the
> block size of both filesystems is still <= page size. So at least ext4
> handles fun
On Sat 20-06-15 00:07:39, Al Viro wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 09:31:16PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 10:57:15AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > > Joy... Folks, is anybody actively maintaining fs/ufs these days?
> > >
> > > Looking into the changelog there wasn't anyone ser
On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 09:31:16PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 10:57:15AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > Joy... Folks, is anybody actively maintaining fs/ufs these days?
> >
> > Looking into the changelog there wasn't anyone seriously looking into UFS
> > for at least 5-6 years.
On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 10:57:15AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > Joy... Folks, is anybody actively maintaining fs/ufs these days?
>
> Looking into the changelog there wasn't anyone seriously looking into UFS
> for at least 5-6 years... Fabian did some cleanups recently but they were
> mostly cosmeti
On Fri 05-06-15 23:03:48, Al Viro wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 07:50:18PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > Basically, we have
> > i_mutex: file size changes, contents-affecting syscalls. Per-inode.
> > truncate_mutex: block pointers changes. Per-inode.
> > s_lock: block and inode bitmaps
> On 04 June 2015 at 07:01 Al Viro wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 02:57:35PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Wed, 27 May 2015 21:15:30 +0200 Fabian Frederick wrote:
> >
> > > This reverts commit 9ef7db7f38d0
> > > ("ufs: fix deadlocks introduced by sb mutex merge")
> > > That patch tri
> On 05 June 2015 at 20:50 Al Viro wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 06:27:01PM +0200, Fabian Frederick wrote:
>
> > You're asking to remove lock_ufs() in allocation and replace it by
> > truncate_mutex. I guess you're talking about doing that on current rc
> > (without s_lock restored).
> >
On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 07:50:18PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> Basically, we have
> i_mutex: file size changes, contents-affecting syscalls. Per-inode.
> truncate_mutex: block pointers changes. Per-inode.
> s_lock: block and inode bitmaps changes. Per-filesystem.
>
> For UFS it's
On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 06:27:01PM +0200, Fabian Frederick wrote:
> You're asking to remove lock_ufs() in allocation and replace it by
> truncate_mutex. I guess you're talking about doing that on current rc
> (without s_lock restored).
>
> I tried a quick patch on rc trying to convert lock_ufs()/
On Thu, Jun 04, 2015 at 06:01:23AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> So we need
> * per-page exclusion for reallocation time (normal page locks are
> doing that)
> * per-fs exclusion for block and fragment allocations (->s_lock?)
> * per-fs exclusion for inode allocations (->s_lock?)
>
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 02:57:35PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 27 May 2015 21:15:30 +0200 Fabian Frederick wrote:
>
> > This reverts commit 9ef7db7f38d0
> > ("ufs: fix deadlocks introduced by sb mutex merge")
> > That patch tried to solve
> > Commit 0244756edc4b98c
> > ("ufs: sb
11 matches
Mail list logo
