From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8229C5DF62 for ; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 10:40:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66DE120869 for ; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 10:40:58 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=mykernel.net header.i=cgxu519@mykernel.net header.b="YYblifOE" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728689AbfKFKk6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Nov 2019 05:40:58 -0500 Received: from sender2-pp-o92.zoho.com.cn ([163.53.93.251]:25342 "EHLO sender3-pp-o92.zoho.com.cn" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726656AbfKFKk6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Nov 2019 05:40:58 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1573036838; cv=none; d=zoho.com.cn; s=zohoarc; b=FhHWEYQ6zGUTNZr2Ifc/U5dLrJgTNBKTEBFTsK/UGWC4kf5H3fkRaQkBfVvvt3itcPee1bG6FX9r/1/qUY3cUpkelo81uWP/cbsilt+Gbp45Oc1K1kVJ18BfRKkudW1TxO1o0RdETTqRRh1uW2EdeyAQSDssa2uSJCs4cKXmA5k= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zoho.com.cn; s=zohoarc; t=1573036838; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:From:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Reply-To:References:Subject:To; bh=qKcoxG0Mx09fjX3RK8sRBS/HXfNVwIIEH4GxkGM68AM=; b=eYUNN16TaBzFeQ7LsdYC/YbrCyD3r/LER66Dfl1tmvhYi34Cr88XsrNhsBTbka35KPHiWdpBMWPOoIRB6mmdCcWWE7yoUDa2LTA4BLUNOdsX/MdLOQwfosPjTWBjW6H6CFiBT3sqEVF5G9YEbPwRFTTWHj6V286CUUzGEvGrcNM= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zoho.com.cn; dkim=pass header.i=mykernel.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cgxu519@mykernel.net; dmarc=pass header.from= header.from= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1573036838; s=zohomail; d=mykernel.net; i=cgxu519@mykernel.net; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; l=3079; bh=qKcoxG0Mx09fjX3RK8sRBS/HXfNVwIIEH4GxkGM68AM=; b=YYblifOEMd2nqy7+iXxSXxdOzTsvpS7uElR6nwObgm/Zj/Ff8i6V3tJisCEOZAcJ b8SoFY/d+Db+19b33uTuLayiyzQJ40wT5A0mHvPUOQEUQKZJmKn6mJw5t9X6ji1GlwB YrJ4qa8DGNbvDxEW7VaA+Ap1paqGVZoNV6H12/ug= Received: from mail.baihui.com by mx.zoho.com.cn with SMTP id 1573036836449372.56275490652695; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 18:40:36 +0800 (CST) Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2019 18:40:36 +0800 From: Chengguang Xu Reply-To: cgxu519@mykernel.net To: "Jan Kara" Cc: "adilger.kernel" , "tytso" , "Jan Kara" , "linux-ext4" Message-ID: <16e404d465e.ddfd6f53546.5756417115406096069@mykernel.net> In-Reply-To: <20191106094924.GA16085@quack2.suse.cz> References: <20191015102327.5333-1-cgxu519@mykernel.net> <20191015112523.GB29554@quack2.suse.cz> <16e3f00ed3d.da5d5acd1285.2289879597060795256@mykernel.net> <20191106094924.GA16085@quack2.suse.cz> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ext4: choose hardlimit when softlimit is larger than hardlimit in ext4_statfs_project() MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: Medium User-Agent: ZohoCN Mail X-Mailer: ZohoCN Mail Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org ---- =E5=9C=A8 =E6=98=9F=E6=9C=9F=E4=B8=89, 2019-11-06 17:49:24 Jan Kara <= jack@suse.cz> =E6=92=B0=E5=86=99 ---- > On Wed 06-11-19 12:37:35, Chengguang Xu wrote: > > ---- =E5=9C=A8 =E6=98=9F=E6=9C=9F=E4=BA=8C, 2019-10-15 19:25:23 Jan K= ara =E6=92=B0=E5=86=99 ---- > > > On Tue 15-10-19 18:23:27, Chengguang Xu wrote: > > > > Setting softlimit larger than hardlimit seems meaningless > > > > for disk quota but currently it is allowed. In this case, > > > > there may be a bit of comfusion for users when they run > > > > df comamnd to directory which has project quota. > > > >=20 > > > > For example, we set 20M softlimit and 10M hardlimit of > > > > block usage limit for project quota of test_dir(project id 123). > > > >=20 > > > > [root@hades mnt_ext4]# repquota -P -a > > > > *** Report for project quotas on device /dev/loop0 > > > > Block grace time: 7days; Inode grace time: 7days > > > > Block limits File limits > > > > Project used soft hard grace used soft hard = grace > > > > -----------------------------------------------------------------= ----- > > > > 0 -- 13 0 0 2 0 0 > > > > 123 -- 10237 20480 10240 5 200 100 > > > >=20 > > > > The result of df command as below: > > > >=20 > > > > [root@hades mnt_ext4]# df -h test_dir > > > > Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on > > > > /dev/loop0 20M 10M 10M 50% /home/cgxu/test/mnt_ext4 > > > >=20 > > > > Even though it looks like there is another 10M free space to use, > > > > if we write new data to diretory test_dir(inherit project id), > > > > the write will fail with errno(-EDQUOT). > > > >=20 > > > > After this patch, the df result looks like below. > > > >=20 > > > > [root@hades mnt_ext4]# df -h test_dir > > > > Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on > > > > /dev/loop0 10M 10M 3.0K 100% /home/cgxu/test/mnt_ext4 > > > >=20 > > > > Signed-off-by: Chengguang Xu > > > > --- > > > > - Fix a bug in the limit setting logic. > > >=20 > > > Thanks for the patch! It looks good to me. You can add: > > >=20 > > > Reviewed-by: Jan Kara > > >=20 > >=20 > > Hi Jan, > >=20 > > I have a proposal for another direction. > > Could we add a check for soft limit in quota layer when setting the v= alue? > > So that we could not bother with specific file systems on statfs().= =20 >=20 > What do you mean exactly? To not allow softlimit to be larger than > hardlimit? That would make some sense but I don't think the risk of > breaking some user that accidentally depends on current behavior is wort= h > the few checks we can save... >=20 =20 Actually, I thought exactly same as you when I wrote my patch for statfs() = of ext4. However, even though softlimit > hardlimit, we cannot allow user to use blo= cks or inode more than hardlimit. IOW, the limit is always there and fixed in this situ= ation. So how about set softlimit to hardlimit when softlimit > hardlimit and ret= urn with success? Thanks, Chengguang