[Top] [All Lists]

Re: xfs_growfs fix backport for 2.6.16.y

To: Ed Cashin <ecashin@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: xfs_growfs fix backport for 2.6.16.y
From: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 12:01:01 +1000
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, Adrian Bunk <bunk@xxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20080825153931.GD7575@xxxxxxxxxx>
Mail-followup-to: Ed Cashin <ecashin@xxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, Adrian Bunk <bunk@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20080825153931.GD7575@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 11:39:31AM -0400, Ed Cashin wrote:
> Dave Chinner, hello.
> Your fix for the counters that had been preventing an XFS from growing
> by more than two terabytes went into 2.6.21, after the introduction of
> the per-cpu in-core superblock counters.  The per-cpu in-core
> superblock counters are not in the latest version of the long-lived
> stable kernel 2.6.16.y, maintained by Adrian Bunk.
> The problem with growing by more than two terabytes appears to be
> there, though.  The kernel will not allow me to grow an XFS
> by, e.g., 10 terabytes, so xfs_growfs does not report any change in
> the data blocks.
> I backported your fix,
>     commit 20f4ebf2bf2f57c1a9abb3655391336cc90314b3
>     Author: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>
>     Date:   Sat Feb 10 18:36:10 2007 +1100
>         [XFS] Make growfs work for amounts greater than 2TB
>         The free block modification code has a 32bit interface, limiting the 
> size
>         the filesystem can be grown even on 64 bit machines. On 32 bit 
> machines,
>         there are other 32bit variables in transaction structures and 
> interfaces
>         that need to be expanded to allow this to work.
>         SGI-PV: 959978
>         SGI-Modid: xfs-linux-melb:xfs-kern:27894a
>         Signed-off-by: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>
>         Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>         Signed-off-by: Tim Shimmin <tes@xxxxxxx>
> ... to the 2.6.16.y git tree, and the result is included below.  When
> I apply this backported fix to, I can grow an online XFS by
> 10 terabytes without any trouble.
> Do you see any problems with this backport?  If not, I will submit it
> for inclusion in the next 2.6.16.y release.

I suggest you make sure it passes test 078 in the xfsqa suite (part
of the xfs-cmds tree) as that tests all the nasty growfs corner
cases. You'll need to test it on 32 bit and 64 bit machines....

If it passes that then I don't see any problems - SGI backported
this for sles10 which is based on 2.6.16 a long time ago.


Dave Chinner

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>