xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Mails sent to the XFS mailing list

To: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Mails sent to the XFS mailing list
From: Somdeep Dey <somdeepdey10@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2015 19:50:50 +0530
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=yaGApVjeN1FyfTKIc0NnNSy9JjwiZEbrToGaOOpgtFo=; b=vtfThYw3B85yDf+KnWAgMhB3C5KWhPATSNz2xAryor8KAn0+Jg1PFf7vh17pZh1AhA p71R2qQUYmMS4PAFR+EM547QHxbLkER+tlh7Q64L7pjK+zUGQoX/a3jqlV34u9Hgmnqz 3jyTfpDjQmK5KE6ph8pJ/6uPanwiwDQYHg21y+BBN6ysudsn7nzL95SyR5vky4z14cYy 8duatiSEyywa4ZVuZB5FCAq+eei+wcHCcu3RJ+nOcJFjyBQ3rheKE3R6yBiWD/n3P501 AtQ7XmQxPDBtoZj+5O3ygypscQhH/QB6U4K4LdJ+4xqS31+NU0QnrJulHsTzi/M4kHCV xaQw==
In-reply-to: <CAJAKVEFD+eGgJ1W8i-t=PkifuVtVOka1hwqKWSo_5nLQo2r88g@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <CAJAKVEGb0aByGqg28anFG4SJVjP-Z3Qs_=JiDMSu_4Gd4nvAbA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20150204195555.GR6282@dastard> <CAJAKVEFD+eGgJ1W8i-t=PkifuVtVOka1hwqKWSo_5nLQo2r88g@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hi Dave,

We have sent a RFD mail on the mailing list about the current task that we
are doing: defragmenting parts of a file. (Haven't got a response yet)

http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2015-02/msg00264.html

We were actually stuck on a logical aspect, of how to go ahead performing
defragmentation without creating a temporary file, and then copy extents to it.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

File: fsr/xfs_fsr.c

In fsr/xfs_fsr.c code , we also had a doubt about how to modify the number of
extents for the temp file getting created.

Line 1321 onwards:
It would be of great help if u could shed some light on the ioctl's -
XFS_IOC_UNRESVSP64 and XFS_IOC_RESVSP64,

We took a test case where a file had 3 extents. The for loop at line 1321 now
had nextents value as 1 (i.e ideal extent count 1) and
outmap[extent].bmv_length was addition of all blocks, i.e. outmap[ ] array had
one index (for 1 ideal extent)

After that we tried running a defragmentation test, by making read_fd_bmap()
function return nextents value as 2, and subsequently made outmap[ ] have
two entries instead of one.

However the temp file that got created (Line 1321 onwards) still had
new_nextents
as 1 (Line 1382) instead of having 2.
Any thoughts ? :)

Regards,
A-DRS

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: Mails sent to the XFS mailing list, Somdeep Dey <=