On Wed, 2013-05-15 at 17:56 -0400, Michael L. Semon wrote:
Irrespective of the user space changes, this patchset should work
properly with the current tools and existing filesystems providing
Let me know of the anomalies as the ones below.
> On 05/15/2013 04:41 PM, Chandra Seetharaman wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-05-14 at 04:52 -0400, Michael L. Semon wrote:
> >> Hi! I seem to have no luck in getting v8 of the pquota/uquota patchset
> >> working and have it pass xfstests with flying colors. Is v8 of the
> >> pquota/gquota patchset sufficient to make the new separate pquota/gquota
> >> bits work? Or is it an incremental patchset?
> > Hi Michael,
> > I will post the user level changes that accompanies these changes.
> > With those changes you can do a new mkfs and use pquota and gquota
> > together.
> > Regards,
> > Chandra
> As for the rest of your issues, I'll have to retest very slowly using
> your new userspace patches, documenting every step in order. It will
> also require before/after runs of xfstests.
> I do not know what your patches do for filesystems that already had
> quota on them, so I ask you to check one thing. It looked like the
> result of the normal `quota` command was having issues. On my root
> filesystem that was mounted uquota only, the following is the normal
> behavior (as an ordinary user):
> mls:~$ quota
> Disk quotas for user mls (uid 3001):
> Filesystem blocks quota limit grace files quota limit
> /dev/sda1 165955 262144 327680 2345 8194 16384
> However, before I switched out kernels here, such a command just left a
> blank, as if there was no quota there. If you would at that to your
> list of spot-check tests, that would be great. It might work fine for
> you. [For the same situation, `xfs_quota -c quota /` worked just fine.]
> You're leading a blind man in the dark, so I thank you for your patience.