On Sun, Jan 08, 2017 at 11:30:28AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Jan 04, 2017 at 09:33:51AM -0500, Brian Foster wrote: > > Presumably this patch addresses the potential deadlock issues from the > > previous version, but the commit log description makes no mention of it > > whatsoever. While the code seems fine, I think the commit log > > description needs more information wrt to that situation and the > > relationship/dependency with minleft. > > Ok. > > > The comment above xfs_alloc_set_aside() already touches on the writeback > > situation, but why 4 blocks per ag? Wasn't the intent to use > > worst_indlen() since that's the base for minleft? > > No, I've given up on that. worst_indlen deals with the fact that > for converting a delayed extent of a given length we might need multiple > real extents, possible in different AGs. > > This version of the series keeps the previous minleft that is for just > allocating a single extent in the AG - the callers will handle "short" > returns from xfs_bmapi_write and just start a new allocation. And > except for a corner case in the large directory block allocation code > these are in a new / rolled over transaction. Fixing the latter also > is on my todo list, but it's another big issue that so far hasn't > trigger in practive, so I'd like to keep it in a separate series. > Ok, anything you can include in the commit log and/or comment that helps clarify that is appreciated. Brian > > Also, it looks like this causes a regression in xfs/004. On a quick > > look, we might just need a test update however... > > Yes. Hard to do in a series for the kernel, though :) > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
