[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] Printk for ENOSPC due to lack of inodes

To: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Printk for ENOSPC due to lack of inodes
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 22:31:21 -0500
In-reply-to: <20120531193616.GA3953@xxxxxxxxx>
References: <20120227003733.GA28162@Xye> <4F579D4C.4040208@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20120531193616.GA3953@xxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1
On 5/31/12 2:36 PM, Raghavendra D Prabhu wrote:
> Hi,
> Thanks for the review. I have now moved it inside xfs_dialloc. Along with 
> adding the message, I noticed that the loop
>     while (!agi->agi_freecount) {
>     }
> is redundant when noroom=1 and okalloc=0.
> Also, xfs_ialloc_ag_alloc function in the loop calls 
> ============
>     if (mp->m_maxicount &&
>         mp->m_sb.sb_icount + XFS_IALLOC_INODES(mp) > mp->m_maxicount) {
> ===============
> condition again.
> So I have moved xfs_tran_brelse etc. into the condition along with message.
> Is this logic valid? If it is, then I will look into rate-limiting the 
> message etc.

It'd be easiest to understand this new change as a patch rather than as a 

If you are changing logic or flow in addition to adding the messages, it should 
almost certainly be sent as more than one patch.



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