On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 01:47:24PM -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > > Actually, I don't believe that's entirely accurate. The performance > problem with shared filesystem roots for containers has meant OpenVZ has > been using a block root for a while. However, we still support the old > shared filesystem root, but for quota's within the chroot, we use a subtree > quota system (not a project quota) for which Dmitry Monakhov > posted the patches several times a couple of years ago. The XFS-compatible project quota is effectively a subtree quota system. My argument is that if we're going to try to get something like this upstream, it should have the same properties as the XFS project quota system; and that should be semantically compatible with the patches you are using. (If we end up using the same ioctl's as xfs_quota uses, which in theory I'm in favor of, but which I haven't studied yet, then it might not be ABI compatible with Dmitry's patches, but it should simplify the patches that OpenVZ would need to carry.) - Ted -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
