On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:40:08AM +0200, David Sterba wrote: > On Mon, Apr 09, 2012 at 09:37:08AM +0800, Liu Bo wrote: > > The whole thing is about our overcommit stuff, that is, > > since we are not able to get _precise_ number of reservation right now, we usually > > reserve more than what we need. > > For this, we've done overcommit dance (thanks for Josef's work!) but it's still not > > enough for our reservation when we still have some disk space. > > > > I'm ok with this revert, but since we don't use up all the reserved space in most time, > > I assume the following can be an alternative, thanks, > > Unfortunatelly the situation looks not good for 3.3 btrfs users, I'm > looking for something we know that somehow (ie like in 3.2) works and > are able to submit to the stable tree very soon. I'll definitelly test > your alternative and if Chris applies it during the -rc phase we'll have > more time to verify it or you/Josef fix it in another way. Lets do the alternative of reverting the patch and dropping the warning. I've been trying to find a small and simple patch for that but I don't think that's going to happen for a stable commit. -chris -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
