Hi Ted,
On Fri, Jun 09, 2023 at 07:11:31PM -0700, Krister Johansen wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 09, 2023 at 12:22:39AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > As far as your patch is concerned, resize2fs can do both off-line
> > (unmounted) and on-line (mounted) resizes. And turning direct I/O
> > unconditionally isn't a great idea for off-line resizes --- it will
> > really trash the performance of the resize.
>
> Thanks for the additional detail.
>
> I also double-checked to make sure these systems had the following patch
> applied:
>
> 05c2c00f3769 ext4: protect superblock modifications with a buffer lock
>
> And they do. Not sure if that's directly applicable to the online
> resize case though.
>
> > Does this patch work for you instead?
>
> Thanks, it does!
>
> > diff --git a/resize/main.c b/resize/main.c
> > index 94f5ec6d..f914c050 100644
> > --- a/resize/main.c
> > +++ b/resize/main.c
> > @@ -409,6 +409,8 @@ int main (int argc, char ** argv)
> >
> > if (!(mount_flags & EXT2_MF_MOUNTED) && !print_min_size)
> > io_flags = EXT2_FLAG_RW | EXT2_FLAG_EXCLUSIVE;
> > + if (mount_flags & EXT2_MF_MOUNTED)
> > + io_flags |= EXT2_FLAG_DIRECT_IO;
> >
> > io_flags |= EXT2_FLAG_64BITS | EXT2_FLAG_THREADS;
> > if (undo_file) {
>
> If it counts:
>
> Reviewed-by: Krister Johansen <kjlx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Tested-by: Krister Johansen <kjlx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Just wanted to check back on this. Should I send a v2 that incorporates
the changes you suggested above?
Thanks,
-K
