1. 06 1月, 2009 3 次提交
  2. 07 1月, 2009 1 次提交
    • F
      ext4: Allow ext4 to run without a journal · 0390131b
      Frank Mayhar 提交于
      A few weeks ago I posted a patch for discussion that allowed ext4 to run
      without a journal.  Since that time I've integrated the excellent
      comments from Andreas and fixed several serious bugs.  We're currently
      running with this patch and generating some performance numbers against
      both ext2 (with backported reservations code) and ext4 with and without
      a journal.  It just so happens that running without a journal is
      slightly faster for most everything.
      
      We did
      	iozone -T -t 4 s 2g -r 256k -T -I -i0 -i1 -i2
      
      which creates 4 threads, each of which create and do reads and writes on
      a 2G file, with a buffer size of 256K, using O_DIRECT for all file opens
      to bypass the page cache.  Results:
      
                           ext2        ext4, default   ext4, no journal
        initial writes   13.0 MB/s        15.4 MB/s          15.7 MB/s
        rewrites         13.1 MB/s        15.6 MB/s          15.9 MB/s
        reads            15.2 MB/s        16.9 MB/s          17.2 MB/s
        re-reads         15.3 MB/s        16.9 MB/s          17.2 MB/s
        random readers    5.6 MB/s         5.6 MB/s           5.7 MB/s
        random writers    5.1 MB/s         5.3 MB/s           5.4 MB/s 
      
      So it seems that, so far, this was a useful exercise.
      Signed-off-by: NFrank Mayhar <fmayhar@google.com>
      Signed-off-by: N"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
      0390131b
  3. 17 12月, 2008 1 次提交
  4. 27 11月, 2008 1 次提交
  5. 26 11月, 2008 3 次提交
  6. 06 1月, 2009 2 次提交
  7. 05 11月, 2008 1 次提交
    • T
      ext4: tone down ext4_da_writepages warnings · 2a21e37e
      Theodore Ts'o 提交于
      If the filesystem has errors, ext4_da_writepages() will return a *lot*
      of errors, including lots and lots of stack dumps.  While it's true
      that we are dropping user data on the floor, which is unfortunate, the
      stack dumps aren't helpful, and they tend to obscure the true original
      root cause of the problem.  So in the case where the filesystem has
      aborted, return an EROFS right away.
      Signed-off-by: N"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
      2a21e37e
  8. 13 12月, 2008 1 次提交
    • T
      ext4: remove do_blk_alloc() · 97df5d15
      Theodore Ts'o 提交于
      The convenience function do_blk_alloc() is a static function with only
      one caller, so fold it into ext4_new_meta_blocks() to simplify the
      code and to make it easier to understand.
      
      To save more stack space, if count is a null pointer in
      ext4_new_meta_blocks() assume that caller wanted a single block (and
      if there is an error, no blocks were allocated).
      Signed-off-by: N"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
      97df5d15
  9. 08 12月, 2008 1 次提交
    • T
      ext4: remove ext4_new_meta_block() · cfe82c85
      Theodore Ts'o 提交于
      There were only two one callers of the function ext4_new_meta_block(),
      which just a very simpler wrapper function around
      ext4_new_meta_blocks().  Change those two functions to call
      ext4_new_meta_blocks() directly, to save code and stack space usage.
      Signed-off-by: N"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
      cfe82c85
  10. 02 1月, 2009 1 次提交
  11. 07 1月, 2009 1 次提交
  12. 07 12月, 2008 1 次提交
  13. 29 10月, 2008 2 次提交
  14. 30 10月, 2008 1 次提交
  15. 05 1月, 2009 20 次提交