Hi mingming： I have tested your patch in 2.6.29-rc1. The sum of characters which i had written were fewer than the block softlimit,but a warning occurs. # edquota -u quser1 Disk quotas for user quser1 (uid 504): Filesystem blocks soft hard inodes soft hard /dev/sda7 0 5 10 0 5 10 Steps to reproduce: # mkfs.ext4 /dev/sda7 # mount /dev/sda7 /mnt -t ext4 # setquota -u quser1 5 10 5 10 /mnt Then log in as quser1 $ cd /mnt $ ll total 20 -rw------- 1 root root 7168 01-20 01:51 aquota.user drwx------ 2 root root 12288 01-20 01:44 lost+found $ vim dd.sh I written some characters,such as abc,then i do wq, the warning occurs likes below: "dd.sh" sda7: write failed, user block limit reached. Mingming Cao 写道: > 在 2009-01-13二的 20:09 +0100，Jan Kara写道： >> On Tue 13-01-09 10:53:17, Mingming Cao wrote: >>> 在 2009-01-13二的 16:37 +0100，Jan Kara写道： >>>> On Mon 12-01-09 16:19:06, Mingming Cao wrote: >>>>> Thanks for your review and suggestions. All points are taken. I have >>>>> updated the quota patches.I am attaching the updated patch here just for >>>>> your review. >>>>> >>>>> I am waiting for the ext4 tree to updated to rebase the whole series >>>>> against 2.6.29-rc1 plus ext4 patch queue. >>>>> >>>> <snip> >>>>> Quota: Add quota reservation support >>>>> >>>>> Delayed allocation defers the block allocation at the dirty pages >>>>> flush-out time, doing quota charge/check at that time is too late. >>>>> But we can't charge the quota blocks until blocks are really allocated, >>>>> otherwise users could get overcharged after reboot from system crash. >>>>> >>>>> This patch adds quota reservation for delayed llocation. Quota blocks >>>>> are reserved in memory, inode and quota won't gets dirtied until later >>>>> block allocation time. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Mingming Cao <cmm@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>> The patch is fine. You can add >>>> >>>> Acked-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> >>>> >>>> How do you want to merge the patches? Via ext4 patch queue? >>>> There's one generic quota patch that I also need to push to fix some OCFS2 >>>> issue and it collides with your patchset. And also there're further >>>> cleanups in quota code which are long overdue which I want to base on all >>>> other patches. So I've decided to setup quota git tree. I'll pull in your >>>> two VFS quota patches. Will that work for you? >>> I think a quota tree is the best place to hold all these quota changes. >>> The ext4 part probably make sense to stay together with the vfs changes, >>> but it will need to coordinate with Ted's ext4 tree. Ted, what do you >>> think? >> Yes. The best would be if could pull quota changes from my tree but you >> could also just carry your two patches and only leave merging them with >> vanilla to me. >> > Sure, that works for me. > >>> BTW, there are other two quota cleanup patches that you have already >>> acked. I will sent the 2.6.29-rc1 based version. >> Yes. Thanks. >> > > Attached are all the 5 2.6.29-rc1 based patches, including the two > cleanups. > > Thanks! > > Mingming > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
