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 27827C5DF62 for ; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 04:38:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A887C2075C for ; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 04:38:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=mykernel.net header.i=cgxu519@mykernel.net header.b="JrS6+vew" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731203AbfKFEiA (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Nov 2019 23:38:00 -0500 Received: from sender2-pp-o92.zoho.com.cn ([163.53.93.251]:25359 "EHLO sender3-pp-o92.zoho.com.cn" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729774AbfKFEiA (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Nov 2019 23:38:00 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1573015059; cv=none; d=zoho.com.cn; s=zohoarc; b=ZvoLyfgJ75zT6WtbEFmmG9QmwRuojVjdLJez0i4kZXPMYvjeeqRhZ62e1alUU5sdZSZavOFfCg/RrRDeYFvT3jU0sKHPgUzhvAYT/T4vYCJg9D+B22cFQjGNLG7RKV3JyeGQcscxdJP2xX1G49ZXX5P9ZnhY52B4LDNzZgivgQU= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zoho.com.cn; s=zohoarc; t=1573015059; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:From:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Reply-To:References:Subject:To; bh=9SmfZSPSU/d+WPI28gb5yeMdxiYp2jtXKO5e0IclLYM=; b=Q3Ncm5ZvFUzVpYNBa2nuHX35MIJpZV9bPsN7fn/2hLiQHKAgpXkzyyRWZDcq5ho4zkKRGdXyapnfhvsH7YVoudOezBd1GKLNDXTXZZ3G347r31iBb0pTducfAXvUN3BmVIDIkz48cjqO8fxCnN9wpbURQFCO0h5Q1lnhMZ5SeiE= 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=1573015059; 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=2053; bh=9SmfZSPSU/d+WPI28gb5yeMdxiYp2jtXKO5e0IclLYM=; b=JrS6+vewlOxZYvjBfaonRb6lviKX5XrHbKieXXeAdT97mapGVOedWL2b9zR3VkBM Wl8owWOGX4LKFD/roo1HiahDJUXrveSeBIF03IDTPhPE3Joe/8VMHR24LE/ugaP0HlX tQg68NDsrfdS4hA0cqestm1elFFCta0D1eNcznAE= Received: from mail.baihui.com by mx.zoho.com.cn with SMTP id 1573015055681539.5346250763338; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 12:37:35 +0800 (CST) Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2019 12:37:35 +0800 From: Chengguang Xu Reply-To: cgxu519@mykernel.net To: "Jan Kara" Cc: "adilger.kernel" , "tytso" , "Jan Kara" , "linux-ext4" Message-ID: <16e3f00ed3d.da5d5acd1285.2289879597060795256@mykernel.net> In-Reply-To: <20191015112523.GB29554@quack2.suse.cz> References: <20191015102327.5333-1-cgxu519@mykernel.net> <20191015112523.GB29554@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=BA=8C, 2019-10-15 19:25:23 Jan Kara <= jack@suse.cz> =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 Hi Jan, I have a proposal for another direction. Could we add a check for soft limit in quota layer when setting the value? So that we could not bother with specific file systems on statfs().=20 Thanks, Chengguang