SEARCH  

NEWS

2010.10.06:11:36:28
Komputronik: rośnie rola usług na rynku salonów komputerowych
Polski rynek salonów komputerowych zmienia swój charakter z typowo sprzedażowego na usługowy. W ten sposób salony wchodzą w wysokomarżowy segment gospodarki, który zajmowany był do tej pory przez wyspecjalizowane firmy. Jednocześnie zyskują nowe atuty w konkurencji z dużymi marketami elektronicznymi.

 

176527444040_507660007227Jan Blunck
I think it is wrong to unconditionally take the lock before calling atomic_dec_and_test() in _atomic_dec_and_lock(). This will deadlock in situation where it is known that the counter will now reach

 
147124944857_547560007470Jan Blunck
Creates the proper struct union_mount when mounting something into a union. If the topmost filesystem isnt capable of handling the white-out filetype it could only be mount read-only. Signed-off-by:

 
128128414867_503360007020Jan Blunck
From: Valerie Aurora (Henson) <vaurora@xxxxxxxxxx Add support for fallthru entries to tmpfs. Signed-off-by: Valerie Aurora (Henson) <vaurora@xxxxxxxxxx --- fs/dcache.c | 4 ++- fs/libfs

 
183229984742_582460007312Jan Blunck
Honor the S_OPAQUE flag in the union path lookup. Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <jblunck@xxxxxxx Signed-off-by: Valerie Aurora (Henson) <vaurora@xxxxxxxxxx --- fs/namei.c | 17 ++++++++++++++-

 
151826254456_584960007099Jan Blunck
Add per mountpoint flag for Union Mount support. You need additional patches to util-linux for that to work - see: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/utils/util-linux-ng/val/util-linux-ng.git Signed-off-

 
154828424844_558860007038Jan Blunck
This patch changes real_lookup() into returning a struct path. Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <jblunck@xxxxxxx Signed-off-by: Valerie Aurora (Henson) <vaurora@xxxxxxxxxx --- fs/namei.c | 82 ++

 
181623884532_567260007842Jan Blunck
Simply white-out a given directory entry. This functionality is usually used in the sense of unlink. Therefore the given dentry can still be in-use and contains an in-use inode. The filesystems inode

 
114221454682_500960007767Jan Blunck
Add some additional checks when mounting something into an union. Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <jblunck@xxxxxxx Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@xxxxxxx Signed-off-by: Valerie Aurora (He

 
102920094765_577260007340Jan Blunck
From: Valerie Aurora (Henson) <vaurora@xxxxxxxxxx Define the fallthru dcache flag and file system op. Signed-off-by: Valerie Aurora (Henson) <vaurora@xxxxxxxxxx --- include/linux/dcache.h

 
108323524966_554060007042Jan Blunck
From: Valerie Aurora (Henson) <vaurora@xxxxxxxxxx Define the fallthru dcache flag and file system op. Signed-off-by: Valerie Aurora (Henson) <vaurora@xxxxxxxxxx --- include/linux/dcache.h

 
163927484884_548360007802Jan Blunck
This patch adds support for whiteouts to tmpfs. Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <jblunck@xxxxxxx Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Signed-off-by: Valerie Aurora (Henson) <vaur

 
152221524190_505460007053Jan Blunck
This patch adds support for whiteouts to tmpfs. Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <jblunck@xxxxxxx Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Signed-off-by: Valerie Aurora (Henson) <vaur

 
189629674198_557860007376Jan Blunck
The userspace isnt ready for handling another filetype. Therefore this patch lets readdir() and others skip over the whiteout directory entries they might find. Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <j.blunc

 
134420054386_510860007219Jan Blunck
The userspace isnt ready for handling another filetype. Therefore this patch lets readdir() and others skip over the whiteout directory entries they might find. Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <j.blunc

 
144928604571_541460007772Jan Blunck
Break early when somebody tries to rehash an already hashed dentry. Otherwise this leads to interesting corruptions in the dcache hash table later on. Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <jblunck@xxxxxxx

 
145720384520_534060007856Jan Blunck
Break early when somebody tries to rehash an already hashed dentry. Otherwise this leads to interesting corruptions in the dcache hash table later on. Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <jblunck@xxxxxxx

 
114220444008_533260007833Arnd Bergmann
Jan Blunck: +Rename across different levels of the union is implemented as a copy-up +operation for regular files. Rename of directories simply returns EXDEV, the +same as if we tried to renam

 
138629944799_558460007775Arnd Bergmann
Jan Blunck: +Rename across different levels of the union is implemented as a copy-up +operation for regular files. Rename of directories simply returns EXDEV, the +same as if we tried to renam

 
196129164780_534760007556Valerie Aurora
Arnd Bergmann: Right, but that is consistent with how the kernel would treat a rename from one mount point to another, and tools like mv can handle this in user space. Yes, that is the descri

 
156624744416_513760007816Valerie Aurora
Arnd Bergmann: Right, but that is consistent with how the kernel would treat a rename from one mount point to another, and tools like mv can handle this in user space. Yes, that is the descri

 
190923454855_542860007376Valerie Aurora
Valerie Aurora: Ah, we did implement that in an earlier version. I dont know if we dropped the patch by accident or on purpose, but the original version is below. We will either put this fea

 
128428284420_529360007519Valerie Aurora
Valerie Aurora: Ah, we did implement that in an earlier version. I dont know if we dropped the patch by accident or on purpose, but the original version is below. We will either put this fea

 
112525454513_592460007084Valerie Aurora
On May 18, 2009 16:40 -0400, Valerie Aurora wrote: @@ -705,8 +707,9 @@ struct ext2_dir_entry_2 { #define EXT2_FT_FIFO 5 #define EXT2_FT_SOCK 6 #define EXT2_FT_SYMLINK 7 +#define EXT2

 
169820905000_547760007024Valerie Aurora
On May 18, 2009 16:40 -0400, Valerie Aurora wrote: @@ -705,8 +707,9 @@ struct ext2_dir_entry_2 { #define EXT2_FT_FIFO 5 #define EXT2_FT_SOCK 6 #define EXT2_FT_SYMLINK 7 +#define EXT2

 
103320034499_544960007387Jan Blunck
On Mon, 18 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: Here is another post of the VFS based union mount implementation. Traditionally the mount operation is opaque, which means that the content of the moun

 
126420494732_511860007418Jan Blunck
On Mon, 18 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: Here is another post of the VFS based union mount implementation. Traditionally the mount operation is opaque, which means that the content of the moun

 
149527634245_591660007405Jan Blunck
On Tue, 19 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: The directory in the topmost filesystem is created during lookup. The contents of the directory isnt copied up presistently at that point in time. Therefo

 
143421804950_594760007079Jan Blunck
On Tue, 19 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: The directory in the topmost filesystem is created during lookup. The contents of the directory isnt copied up presistently at that point in time. Therefo

 
103128034169_503160007606Jan Blunck
On Tuesday 19 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: So this means that the topmost branch always needs to be writable, right?  It isnt possible to make a union of two iso9660 filesystems, for

 
105523134609_555560007750Jan Blunck
On Tuesday 19 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: So this means that the topmost branch always needs to be writable, right?  It isnt possible to make a union of two iso9660 filesystems, for

 
194220264800_567460007278Jan Blunck
On Tuesday 19 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: On Tue, May 19, Arnd Bergmann wrote: This would work, but youd have to do this for each file system if you want to be able to use it as the top of

 
109126414040_533760007096Miklos Szeredi
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 11:48:00AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: On Mon, 18 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: Here is another post of the VFS based union mount implementation. Traditionally t

 
174229914277_569260007382Miklos Szeredi
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 11:05:27AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: On Tue, 19 May 2009, Valerie Aurora wrote: As Jan said, readdir() of read-only unioned file systems works with a tmpfs top la

 
177129694184_594060007464Jan Blunck
On Tuesday 19 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: On Tue, May 19, Arnd Bergmann wrote: This would work, but youd have to do this for each file system if you want to be able to use it as the top of

 
154620554778_515560007540Valerie Aurora
On Mon, 18 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: Here is another post of the VFS based union mount implementation. Is there any chance this will support NFS? I can union-mount tmpfs over nfs mounted fs, bu

 
190525524567_570560007713Miklos Szeredi
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 11:48:00AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: On Mon, 18 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: Here is another post of the VFS based union mount implementation. Traditionally t

 
198323184353_502360007909Valerie Aurora
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009, Valerie Aurora wrote: On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 02:54:19PM +0200, Jan Rekorajski wrote: On Mon, 18 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: Here is another post of the VFS bas

 
111923974899_539760007837Miklos Szeredi
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 11:05:27AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: On Tue, 19 May 2009, Valerie Aurora wrote: As Jan said, readdir() of read-only unioned file systems works with a tmpfs top la

 
177928604805_596360007805Valerie Aurora
On Mon, 18 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: Here is another post of the VFS based union mount implementation. Is there any chance this will support NFS? I can union-mount tmpfs over nfs mounted fs, bu

 
142723454860_520460007470Valerie Aurora
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009, Valerie Aurora wrote: On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 12:44:06AM +0200, Jan Rekorajski wrote: On Mon, 08 Jun 2009, Valerie Aurora wrote: Youll get -EBUSY on the second

 
174524054021_531260007248Valerie Aurora
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009, Valerie Aurora wrote: On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 02:54:19PM +0200, Jan Rekorajski wrote: On Mon, 18 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: Here is another post of the VFS bas

 
102420914566_537860007220Valerie Aurora
On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 18:08 +0200, Jan Blunck wrote: Here is another post of the VFS based union mount implementation. Awesome work, this may just get us out of a tight spot with our LiveCD. A

 
128622344618_518560007706Valerie Aurora
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009, Valerie Aurora wrote: On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 12:44:06AM +0200, Jan Rekorajski wrote: On Mon, 08 Jun 2009, Valerie Aurora wrote: Youll get -EBUSY on the second

 
102224094565_582760007364Jens Axboe
Hi, This is the fourth version of this patchset. Chances since v3: - Dropped a prep patch, it has been included in mainline since. - Add a work-to-do list to the bdi. This is struct bdi_work. Each

 
163127994710_549160007210Jens Axboe
btrfs puts dirty inodes on there, so it must register a thread to handle them. Also fixes failure to check bdi_init() return value, and bad inherit of - capabilities flags from the default bdi. Sign

 
196127494615_598360007725Valerie Aurora
On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 18:08 +0200, Jan Blunck wrote: Here is another post of the VFS based union mount implementation. Awesome work, this may just get us out of a tight spot with our LiveCD. A

 
123020854816_579660007931Jens Axboe
Also a debugging aid. We want to catch dirty inodes being added to backing devices that dont do writeback. Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@xxxxxxxxxx --- fs/fs-writeback.c |

 
101627504165_563460007797Jens Axboe
Hi, This is the fourth version of this patchset. Chances since v3: - Dropped a prep patch, it has been included in mainline since. - Add a work-to-do list to the bdi. This is struct bdi_work. Each

 
134029584205_590560007577Jens Axboe
Not meant for inclusion, just to monitor what is going on while testing this stuff. Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@xxxxxxxxxx --- mm/backing-dev.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 
126924154376_598060007379Jens Axboe
btrfs puts dirty inodes on there, so it must register a thread to handle them. Also fixes failure to check bdi_init() return value, and bad inherit of - capabilities flags from the default bdi. Sign

 

 

home   |    register   |    login