xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

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

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] Printk for ENOSPC due to lack of inodes
From: Raghavendra D Prabhu <raghu.prabhu13@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 12:16:14 +0530
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to :x-operating-system:x-editor:user-agent; bh=8xKL7J+KIP+LnD2cZdV+1YibJ0bwm7QmfJN8Q1UM6Qg=; b=M70JA/XbwTJLdS5SpIuoOQw1MJ07/ds+Aq2KKnGX37L3fltXlpih1tn00EUMmvqWlQ 6lhOpzm+RPhBZESZ215yI10YNv5s8zkGrevUY4n4cudSt3hCgOXPfHZ0AvHycFHdsQw7 ybYkn63z5nOyeS7qvpEEf7TCnZizLVWBQcKbgMZgyFV32fqohTd7RIRXmmTeoxstmmfn B5h8lSMDDtpnBSznc8hlQ9/O2J39vBpWOnVePv+NInV4JJY3lmETNjHHjl0BpvNSNOiv J2JeccNS0qSsX6MGwFHXr9tHMyqmbmQRJYtazRqYU2Z/qdhOOM4rdLeZ2KLqBcRajfxR BjZw==
In-reply-to: <4FC83789.8010900@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Mail-followup-to: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
References: <20120227003733.GA28162@Xye> <4F579D4C.4040208@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20120531193616.GA3953@xxxxxxxxx> <4FC83789.8010900@xxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2011-07-01)
Hi,

Thanks for reviewing earlier.

I have sent the patch series here from: 
http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2012-06/msg00020.html to 
http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2012-06/msg00023.html


* On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 10:31:21PM -0500, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> 
wrote:
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 
description.

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

Thanks,

-eric

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs





Regards,
--
Raghavendra Prabhu
GPG Id : 0xD72BE977
Fingerprint: B93F EBCB 8E05 7039 CD3C A4B8 A616 DCA1 D72B E977
www: wnohang.net

Attachment: pgpOW0PKerluM.pgp
Description: PGP signature

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