2.6.31-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know. ------------------ (cherry picked from commit fbbf69456619de5d251cb9f1df609069178c62d5) On a 256M filesystem, doing this in a loop: xfs_io -F -f -d -c 'pwrite 0 64m' test rm -f test eventually leads to ENOSPC. (the xfs_io command does a 64m direct IO write to the file "test") As with other block allocation callers, it looks like we need to potentially retry the allocations on the initial ENOSPC. Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- fs/ext4/inode.c | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) --- a/fs/ext4/inode.c +++ b/fs/ext4/inode.c @@ -3372,6 +3372,7 @@ static ssize_t ext4_ind_direct_IO(int rw ssize_t ret; int orphan = 0; size_t count = iov_length(iov, nr_segs); + int retries = 0; if (rw == WRITE) { loff_t final_size = offset + count; @@ -3394,9 +3395,12 @@ static ssize_t ext4_ind_direct_IO(int rw } } +retry: ret = blockdev_direct_IO(rw, iocb, inode, inode->i_sb->s_bdev, iov, offset, nr_segs, ext4_get_block, NULL); + if (ret == -ENOSPC && ext4_should_retry_alloc(inode->i_sb, &retries)) + goto retry; if (orphan) { int err; -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/