On Wed, 2006-03-29 at 17:54 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Mingming Cao <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > The things need to be done to complete this work is the issue with
> > current percpu counter, which could not handle u32 type count well.
>
> I'm surprised there's much of a problem here. It is a 32-bit value, so it
> should mainly be a matter of treating the return value from
> percpu_counter_read() as unsigned long.
>
> However a stickier problem is when dealing with a filesystem which has,
> say, 0xffff_ff00 blocks. Because percpu counters are approximate, and a
> counter which really has a value of 0xffff_feee might return 0x00000123.
> What do we do then?
>
Hmm... I think we had this issue already even with today's 2**31 ext3.
Since ext2/3 always use percpu_counter_read_positive() to get the total
number of free blocks, so if the real free blocks is 0x0fff_feee, and
the approximate value from the percpu counter is 0xf000_0123, the
percpu_counter_read_positive() will return back 0x0000123.
> Of course the simple option is to nuke the percpu counters in ext3 and use
> atomic_long_t (which is signed, so appropriate treat-it-as-unsigned code
> would be needed). I doubt if the percpu counters in ext3 are gaining us
> much.
Sounds like the simple solution so far.
Mingming
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]