[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1178571383.3933.8.camel@dyn9047017103.beaverton.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2007 13:56:23 -0700
From: Mingming Cao <cmm@...ibm.com>
To: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
Cc: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
Johann Lombardi <johann.lombardi@...l.net>,
"Amit K. Arora" <aarora@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Dave Chinner <dgc@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.21-ext4-1
On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 11:14 -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> I've respun the ext4 development patchset, with Amit's updated fallocate
> patches. I've added Dave's patch to add ia64 support to the fallocate
> system call, but *not* the XFS fallocate support patches. (Probably
> better for them to live in an xfs tree, where they can more easily
> tested and updated.) Yes, we haven't reached complete closure on the
> fallocate system call calling convention, but it's enough for us to get
> more testing in -mm.
>
> Also added Johann's jbd2-stats-through-procfs patches; it provides
> useful help in turning the size of the journal, which will be useful in
> benchmarking efforts. In addition, Alex Tomas's patch to free
> just-allocated patches when there is an error inserting the extent into
> the extent tree has also been included.
>
> The patches have been compile-tested on x86, and compile/run-tested on
> x86/UML. Would appreciate reports about testing on other platforms.
>
I have tested this patch series on ppc64, x86_64 with
dbench/tiobench/fsx, all runs fine.
I am not sure what level of testing Amit has done about the fallocate()
and preallocation code on various archs. I couldn't find a available
s390 and ia64 machines with free partition yet.
In any case, it would be useful to add a new set of testsuites for the
new fallocate() syscall and fsstress in LTP testsuites to automatically
the preallocation code in ext4/XFS.
thanks,
Mingming
> Thanks,
>
> - Ted
>
> P.S. One bug which I've noted --- if there is a failure due to disk
> filling up, running e2fsck on the filesystem will show that the i_blocks
> fields on the inodes where there was a failure to allocate disk blocks
> are left incorrect. I'm guessing this is a bug in the delayed
> allocation patches. Alex, when you have a moment, could you take a
> look? Thanks!!
> -
> 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
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists