[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140924173742.GI27000@quack.suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 19:37:42 +0200
From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Li Xi <pkuelelixi@...il.com>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org, tytso@....edu, adilger@...ger.ca,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, dmonakhov@...nvz.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] Adds general codes to enforces project quota limits
On Wed 24-09-14 10:13:06, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 07:10:20PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > Yeah, I'm aware of that but I decided I won't bother Li Xi with that
> > since it's independent issue and 8 bytes aren't that terrible.
>
> For the inode of which we have so many instances it is. Especially when
> only one filesystem can make use of this new field.
>
> > Personally
> > I somewhat prefer what I did in
> > http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-fsdevel/msg74927.html
> > where we don't introduce additional method but rather a table with field
> > offsets in superblock. If people agree with this, I can cook up a patch for
> > quota relatively quickly.
>
> There's an even better way. We stopped calling the dquot_* functions
> from generic code, so now the filesystem can simply pass in a pointer
> to the dquot array.
I thought that as well before I tried that :) There are situations like
when turning quotas on & off where we iterate over all inodes and need to
get dquots from the inode... I don't see how to handle those situations
without fs callback / table of offsets.
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists