|To:||Jeff Liu <jeff.liu@xxxxxxxxxx>|
|Subject:||Re: Rambling noise #2: Learning to use the v8 pquota/uquota patchset|
|From:||"Michael L. Semon" <mlsemon35@xxxxxxxxx>|
|Date:||Wed, 15 May 2013 03:13:09 -0400|
|Dkim-signature:||v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=lg9uFIf+YoI5/kc78gOvLKFPltPbuwFcpeWGPqS4hn0=; b=hz4RN5s+y7yo1Hc3QJgsjPMydxO2bNJ1JmnQgs0Z5QJjMX44FaAG3KzUATLlQmfuB1 1SpRiG0v2MZUBXNGLo5NeVFx59fQ5dFYFZWykke3KfNirQ2pNWAJSqCkCY8E3BKQD4Zm 8T4cFDUchaQNwTCkbl7OPN1CgXy3rX+H1TYYL3GPc5tu+A2NMOzDDk4PoeoAwLgbV5HD rt79hDhRgeS1Zu/OuuVzK3o56ZdlPFZW4c66Zq3gAlSf+jFwJsyrSWlo8AL2gn50oM8c /xO1wUX44f18lQsKHJlRikQDAtWODcA3wZc6FCODdrgpU4bSDU5XDwxybGE05wAGL8Zg c9uw==|
|User-agent:||Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6|
On 05/14/2013 09:52 AM, Jeff Liu wrote:
Hi Michael, Have you tried this patch set with the v2 user space changes? Looks this is the latest update from Chandra that I can searched from the mailing list: http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2012-07/msg00293.html Thanks, -Jeff
It looks like it's not patching very well in light of Dave's CRC userspace changes, and I botched the mkfs part of the merge.
For xfsprogs include/xfs_sb.h, Patch #1 has this:+#define XFS_SB_VERSION2_NO_OQUOTA 0x00000100 /* sep prj quota inode */
However, in the current xfsprogs include/xfs_sb.h, there is this line: #define XFS_SB_VERSION2_CRCBIT 0x00000100 /* metadata CRCs */This overloaded meaning of 0x00000100 did not seem right, so after my failure with the finished mkfs.xfs, it was time to go back to the current git xfsprogs. I'm sure that the userspace will be reworked before the kernel code is final. I'll show some patience, and Dave's upcoming CRC code activation will probably force me to back Chandra's patchset out anyway.
Despite my bumbling through it all, the kernel gquota/pquota patchset shows promise.
Thanks! MichaelP.S. - I applied your xfs_growfs_data_private patch, and all seems well so far. In particular, there was no change in the test results from `./check -xfs -g growfs`.
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|
|Previous by Date:||Why xfs can not mount use barrier option?, ch huang|
|Next by Date:||Re: [PATCH v4 05/20] xfs: use ->invalidatepage() length argument, Dave Chinner|
|Previous by Thread:||Re: Rambling noise #2: Learning to use the v8 pquota/uquota patchset, Michael L. Semon|
|Next by Thread:||Re: Rambling noise #2: Learning to use the v8 pquota/uquota patchset, Jeff Liu|
|Indexes:||[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]|