All of
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Iustin Pop <>
Subject: Re: Error setting extent size on a directory
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 21:13:14 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 02:04:50AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 09:09:13AM +0200, Iustin Pop wrote:
> > The xfsctl man page says that an extent size should be settable any time
> > on a directory, so why would this fail? Looking at the kernel sources,
> > I see a number of possible cases where EINVAL is returned:
> And no special casing for directories at all..

I was not sure if di_nextents is valid (tracks the extents number, and
hence can be non-zero for a directory), I'll take this as a

> > So to me this reads as if the di_nextents check can also fail for a
> > directory which has extents, contradicting the man page. Which one needs
> > to be updated?
> > 
> > The question arises to if the extent size also applies, then, to
> > allocating extents for a directory - instead of just being inherited for
> > files (the man page says no).
> We're not using the extent size hint on the directory itself.

Aha, this is good to know.

> So to
> me it seems we just not check for already allocated blocks if we're
> setting the extent size on a directory, but instead maybe make sure
> the directory.

Not sure I parse that - do you mean we should either check for a
directory, or for zero extent count?

> What's also a little odd is that we allow setting
> the extent size on a directory even if the extent size inherit bit is
> not set, which doesn't make much sense to me.

Since the hint it is never used for directories, agreed it doesn't make
sense. Should this be an error (since I don't think warnings can be

> Do you want to prepare a patch to remove the check for directories?
> At testcase for xfstests that ensures this works also would be highly
> useful..

I'll try to. Is the tree against which I should sent the kernel patch at


xfs mailing list

  reply	other threads:[~2014-07-18 19:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-07-14  7:09 Error setting extent size on a directory Iustin Pop
2014-07-17  9:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-07-18 19:13   ` Iustin Pop [this message]
2014-08-28  4:22     ` [PATCH] xfs: fix behaviour of XFS_IOC_FSSETXATTR on directories Iustin Pop
2014-08-28  9:31       ` Dave Chinner
2014-08-28 22:34         ` Iustin Pop
2014-08-29  0:46           ` Dave Chinner
2014-12-04  4:14             ` Iustin Pop
2014-12-05  0:11               ` Dave Chinner
2014-12-05  5:49                 ` Iustin Pop
2014-08-28  4:24     ` [PATCH xfstests] xfs: add tests for XFS_IOC_FSSETXATTR behaviour Iustin Pop
2014-08-28 10:16       ` Dave Chinner
2014-08-28 10:16         ` Dave Chinner
2014-08-28 22:28         ` Iustin Pop
2014-08-28 22:28           ` Iustin Pop
2014-08-29  2:52           ` Dave Chinner
2014-08-29  2:52             ` Dave Chinner
2014-12-04  4:20             ` [PATCH] xfs: add test " Iustin Pop
2014-12-04  4:20               ` Iustin Pop

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.