From: Andreas Dilger <adilger@clusterfs.com>
To: "Stephen C. Tweedie" <sct@redhat.com>
Cc: "ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net"
<ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>, Alex Tomas <alex@clusterfs.com>,
Al Viro <viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: Ext2/3 32-bit stat() wrap for ~2TB files
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 14:27:36 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050211212736.GD16520@schnapps.adilger.int> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1108155135.1944.196.camel@sisko.sctweedie.blueyonder.co.uk>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1775 bytes --]
On Feb 11, 2005 20:52 +0000, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:
> /*
> * Maximal file size. There is a direct, and {,double-,triple-}indirect
> * block limit, and also a limit of (2^32 - 1) 512-byte sectors in i_blocks.
> * We need to be 1 filesystem block less than the 2^32 sector limit.
> */
>
> Trouble is, that limit *should* be an i_blocks limit, because i_blocks
> is still 32-bits, and (more importantly) is multiplied by the fs
> blocksize / 512 in stat(2) to return st_blocks in 512-byte chunks.
> Overflow 2^32 sectors in i_blocks and stat(2) wraps.
I agree. The problem AFAIR is that the i_blocks accounting is done in
the quota code, so it was a challenge to get it right, and the i_size
limit was easier to do. Until now I don't think anyone has created
dense 2TB files, so the sparse limit was enough.
Fixing this to count i_blocks correctly would also allow us to have
larger sparse files (up to the indirect limit).
Note also that there was a patch to extend i_blocks floating around
(pretty small hack to use one of the reserved fields), and it might make
sense to get this into the kernel before we actually need it.
> But i_blocks includes indirect blocks as well as data, so for a
> non-sparse file we wrap stat(2) st_blocks well before the file is
> 2^32*512 bytes long. Yet ext3_max_size() doesn't understand this:
> it simply caps the size with
>
> if (res > (512LL << 32) - (1 << bits))
> res = (512LL << 32) - (1 << bits);
So, for the quick fix we could reduce this by the number of expected
[td]indirect blocks and submit that to 2.4 also.
Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
http://sourceforge.net/projects/ext2resize/
http://members.shaw.ca/adilger/ http://members.shaw.ca/golinux/
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-02-11 21:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-02-11 20:52 Stephen C. Tweedie
2005-02-11 21:27 ` Andreas Dilger [this message]
2005-02-11 21:39 ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2005-02-11 22:50 ` Andreas Dilger
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:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20050211212736.GD16520@schnapps.adilger.int \
--to=adilger@clusterfs.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=alex@clusterfs.com \
--cc=ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sct@redhat.com \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* 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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®