| Message ID | 1363953208-2342-1-git-send-email-wangshilong1991@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Under Review, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Fri, March 22, 2013 at 12:53 (+0100), Wang Shilong wrote: > From: Wang Shilong <wangsl-fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> > > Since btrfs quota rescan has not been implemented yet, > a user complains that "btrfs qgroup show" lists qgroup > referenced/exclusive be negative. However, this should > not happen even if overflow happens,because the type for > qgroup referenced/exclusive is u64,fix it. > > Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong <wangsl-fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> > Reported-by: Koen De Wit <koen.de.wit@oracle.com> > --- > cmds-qgroup.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/cmds-qgroup.c b/cmds-qgroup.c > index 60ca33d..fc4cb13 100644 > --- a/cmds-qgroup.c > +++ b/cmds-qgroup.c > @@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ static int qgroup_create(int create, int argc, char **argv) > > void print_qgroup_info(u64 objectid, struct btrfs_qgroup_info_item *info) > { > - printf("%llu/%llu %lld %lld\n", objectid >> 48, > + printf("%llu/%llu %llu %llu\n", objectid >> 48, > objectid & ((1ll << 48) - 1), > btrfs_stack_qgroup_info_referenced(info), > btrfs_stack_qgroup_info_exclusive(info)); > I don't like that change. Seeing negative numbers is what you should expect in the current situation. Once anyone come across negative numbers with a volume holding more data than what can be tracked with 63 bit, I may come to agree to your change. For now, it will confuse more than help. -Jan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Hello, > > On Fri, March 22, 2013 at 12:53 (+0100), Wang Shilong wrote: >> From: Wang Shilong <wangsl-fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> >> >> Since btrfs quota rescan has not been implemented yet, >> a user complains that "btrfs qgroup show" lists qgroup >> referenced/exclusive be negative. However, this should >> not happen even if overflow happens,because the type for >> qgroup referenced/exclusive is u64,fix it. >> >> Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong <wangsl-fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> >> Reported-by: Koen De Wit <koen.de.wit@oracle.com> >> --- >> cmds-qgroup.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/cmds-qgroup.c b/cmds-qgroup.c >> index 60ca33d..fc4cb13 100644 >> --- a/cmds-qgroup.c >> +++ b/cmds-qgroup.c >> @@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ static int qgroup_create(int create, int argc, char **argv) >> >> void print_qgroup_info(u64 objectid, struct btrfs_qgroup_info_item *info) >> { >> - printf("%llu/%llu %lld %lld\n", objectid >> 48, >> + printf("%llu/%llu %llu %llu\n", objectid >> 48, >> objectid & ((1ll << 48) - 1), >> btrfs_stack_qgroup_info_referenced(info), >> btrfs_stack_qgroup_info_exclusive(info)); >> > > I don't like that change. Seeing negative numbers is what you should expect in > the current situation. > > Once anyone come across negative numbers with a volume holding more data than > what can be tracked with 63 bit, I may come to agree to your change. For now, it > will confuse more than help. Maybe, you are right. But the type for referenced/exclusive is u64. Considering the following case: overflow happens, referenced/exclusive changes into a big positive integer, so next time, when we doing accounting, it may return edquot. So i think the check in the kernel is necessary. Or am i missing something ? Thanks, Wang > > -Jan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Hello, > Hello, > >> >> On Fri, March 22, 2013 at 12:53 (+0100), Wang Shilong wrote: >>> From: Wang Shilong <wangsl-fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> >>> >>> Since btrfs quota rescan has not been implemented yet, >>> a user complains that "btrfs qgroup show" lists qgroup >>> referenced/exclusive be negative. However, this should >>> not happen even if overflow happens,because the type for >>> qgroup referenced/exclusive is u64,fix it. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong <wangsl-fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> >>> Reported-by: Koen De Wit <koen.de.wit@oracle.com> >>> --- >>> cmds-qgroup.c | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/cmds-qgroup.c b/cmds-qgroup.c >>> index 60ca33d..fc4cb13 100644 >>> --- a/cmds-qgroup.c >>> +++ b/cmds-qgroup.c >>> @@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ static int qgroup_create(int create, int argc, char **argv) >>> >>> void print_qgroup_info(u64 objectid, struct btrfs_qgroup_info_item *info) >>> { >>> - printf("%llu/%llu %lld %lld\n", objectid >> 48, >>> + printf("%llu/%llu %llu %llu\n", objectid >> 48, >>> objectid & ((1ll << 48) - 1), >>> btrfs_stack_qgroup_info_referenced(info), >>> btrfs_stack_qgroup_info_exclusive(info)); >>> >> >> I don't like that change. Seeing negative numbers is what you should expect in >> the current situation. >> >> Once anyone come across negative numbers with a volume holding more data than >> what can be tracked with 63 bit, I may come to agree to your change. For now, it >> will confuse more than help. > > Maybe, you are right. > > But the type for referenced/exclusive is u64. Considering the following case: > > overflow happens, referenced/exclusive changes into a big positive integer, so next time, > when we doing accounting, it may return edquot. So i think the check in the kernel is necessary. For the above case, From the user view, the referenced/exclusive is negative, but user can't continue to write data. How strange it is! So, i think to have a check in the kernel and making the referenced/exclusive to be 0 and give a warning in the kernel is better than current situation. If you agree with my approach, i will make the patch and send it next week. ~_~ Thanks, Wang > > Or am i missing something ? > > Thanks, > Wang > > >> >> -Jan > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/cmds-qgroup.c b/cmds-qgroup.c index 60ca33d..fc4cb13 100644 --- a/cmds-qgroup.c +++ b/cmds-qgroup.c @@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ static int qgroup_create(int create, int argc, char **argv) void print_qgroup_info(u64 objectid, struct btrfs_qgroup_info_item *info) { - printf("%llu/%llu %lld %lld\n", objectid >> 48, + printf("%llu/%llu %llu %llu\n", objectid >> 48, objectid & ((1ll << 48) - 1), btrfs_stack_qgroup_info_referenced(info), btrfs_stack_qgroup_info_exclusive(info));