Re: [Fwd: [patch #2508] ext2fs support for large store (> 1.5G)]

Marco Gerards wrote: Right, I forgot about the pokels. But I missed the rationale behind flushing _all_ the pages with ref. count zero. I understand why it has to be zero, I just do not understand why you have to flush all instead of just a few. Perhaps I just read over the text, can you please p

Re: [Fwd: [patch #2508] ext2fs support for large store (> 1.5G)]

Ognyan Kulev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> When there are no pages free you just throw the entire cache away (if >> I understand it correctly). I do not like this because this can be >> one of the main factors that will slow down someone's computer. Isn't >> it possible to ask Mach to evict 10

Re: [Fwd: [patch #2508] ext2fs support for large store (> 1.5G)]

Marco Gerards wrote: disk_pager_read_page removes the RC_MAPPING bit from the flags and notices the disk_cache_wait_remapping that it is safe to continue. But you broadcast the condition before removing the bit. I think this can cause some problems, what do you think? You're right, but this has no

Re: [Fwd: [patch #2508] ext2fs support for large store (> 1.5G)]

Ognyan Kulev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'm not good writer, but my hope is that this description will help for > better understanding of the patch. Actually, it has already helped me > to understand my own patch and to spot some things that better be > changed in RC2 :-) Thanks a lot for you

Re: [Fwd: [patch #2508] ext2fs support for large store (> 1.5G)]

Ognyan Kulev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > /* gnu.org mail servers said I'm spammer, and this is the reason for > delayed announcement. */ You definitely aren't a spammer. :) > Ognyan Kulev wrote: >> I'm writing description of the patch, but I'm still at introduction >> yet. > > It's finally co

Re: [Fwd: [patch #2508] ext2fs support for large store (> 1.5G)]

/* gnu.org mail servers said I'm spammer, and this is the reason for delayed announcement. */ Ognyan Kulev wrote: I'm writing description of the patch, but I'm still at introduction yet. It's finally completed. It's attached as file in http://savannah.gnu.org/patch/index.php?func=detailitem&it

Re: [Fwd: [patch #2508] ext2fs support for large store (> 1.5G)]

Ognyan Kulev wrote: http://debian.fmi.uni-sofia.bg/~ogi/hurd/ext3fs/ext2fs_20040211.txt New snapshot: http://debian.fmi.uni-sofia.bg/~ogi/hurd/ext3fs/ext2fs_20040213.txt It includes "public" interface that is used by EXT2 code. No description of internals yet, neither description of libpager chan

Re: [Fwd: [patch #2508] ext2fs support for large store (> 1.5G)]

Marco Gerards wrote: Ognyan Kulev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Marco Gerards wrote: No, it is not fixed. It is just that the kernel determines the amount of mapped blocks (all individual mappings) and when which mapping should be removed. This is the "next level". I though about it: http://www.

Re: [Fwd: [patch #2508] ext2fs support for large store (> 1.5G)]

Ognyan Kulev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Marco Gerards wrote: >> Something I have noticed is that there is a disk_cache_blocks. I do >> not understand why you have that. You can easily map in every page and >> let GNUMach decide to evict the page (like Neal proposed). But before >> I can say mor

Re: [Fwd: [patch #2508] ext2fs support for large store (> 1.5G)]

Marco Gerards wrote: Something I have noticed is that there is a disk_cache_blocks. I do not understand why you have that. You can easily map in every page and let GNUMach decide to evict the page (like Neal proposed). But before I can say more about it I can better wait for your reply. Do you mean

Re: [Fwd: [patch #2508] ext2fs support for large store (> 1.5G)]

On Sat, Feb 07, 2004 at 01:23:12AM +0100, Marco Gerards wrote: > The changelogs can use some work AFAICS. For example you notice when > you add new local variables, I would not do this. It's ok to do this, in fact, it's correct. Only if you add new functions etc, or do a total rewrite, you are r

Re: [Fwd: [patch #2508] ext2fs support for large store (> 1.5G)]

Marco Gerards wrote: Can you please describe how your patches work? I am familiar with how Neal proposed to fix it. So please describe the theory behind your patch and which function is doing that what you describe. Because this patch it quite big and many people who don't have the time want to di

Re: [Fwd: [patch #2508] ext2fs support for large store (> 1.5G)]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >> I have some comments so far, I will continue to read the patch and >> test it later this weekend. > > Thank you for reviewing the code :-) > > Would you add next comments to Savannah, so that we have all comments > about the patch in one place? I've already added your

Re: [Fwd: [patch #2508] ext2fs support for large store (> 1.5G)]

> I have some comments so far, I will continue to read the patch and > test it later this weekend. Thank you for reviewing the code :-) Would you add next comments to Savannah, so that we have all comments about the patch in one place? I've already added your mail as comment about the patch. My

Re: [Fwd: [patch #2508] ext2fs support for large store (> 1.5G)]

Ognyan Kulev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Hi Ognyan, Thanks a lot for your great work so far! > Original Submission: Finally, the patch is prepared to enter the Hurd. This is good to hear. My first impression of the patch was good (by reading over it very quickly). I have some comments so far

[Fwd: [patch #2508] ext2fs support for large store (> 1.5G)]

It seems that Cc: in Savannah doesn't work, so here is the news: /**/ [patch #2508] Full Item Snapshot: URL: Project: The GNU Hurd Submitted by: Ognyan Kulev On: We