From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755172AbXENNe4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 May 2007 09:34:56 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751906AbXENNes (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 May 2007 09:34:48 -0400 Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz ([195.113.31.123]:36682 "EHLO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751006AbXENNeq (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 May 2007 09:34:46 -0400 Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 15:34:46 +0200 From: Jan Kara To: Andrew Morton Cc: Andreas Dilger , "Amit K. Arora" , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com, suparna@in.ibm.com, cmm@us.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] ext4: fallocate support in ext4 Message-ID: <20070514133445.GA28875@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> References: <20070417125514.GA7574@amitarora.in.ibm.com> <20070418130600.GW5967@schatzie.adilger.int> <20070420135146.GA21352@amitarora.in.ibm.com> <20070420145918.GY355@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <20070424121632.GA10136@amitarora.in.ibm.com> <20070426175056.GA25321@amitarora.in.ibm.com> <20070426181332.GD7209@amitarora.in.ibm.com> <20070503213133.d1559f52.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070507113753.GA5439@schatzie.adilger.int> <20070507135825.f8545a65.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070507135825.f8545a65.akpm@linux-foundation.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > On Mon, 7 May 2007 05:37:54 -0600 > > Does the proposed implementation handle quotas correctly, btw? Has that > been tested? It seems to handle quotas fine - the block allocation itself does not differ from the usual case, just the extents in the tree are marked as uninitialized... The only question is whether DQUOT_PREALLOC_BLOCK() shouldn't be called instead of DQUOT_ALLOC_BLOCK(). Then fallocate() won't be able to allocate anything after the softlimit has been reached which makes some sence but probably current behavior is kind-of less surprising. Honza -- Jan Kara SuSE CR Labs