From: Jan Kara Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] xfstests, generic: add project quota attribute tests Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 12:20:56 +0200 Message-ID: <20160718102056.GA6782@quack2.suse.cz> References: <20160708005127.GK12670@dastard> <20160708024654.GE19871@thunk.org> <77863b4a-95e6-4100-79c2-5cbcaf0872e7@sandeen.net> <20160708050228.GH19871@thunk.org> <20160711161556.GB9334@quack2.suse.cz> <20160711171242.GA21285@thunk.org> <20160712105908.GE16460@quack2.suse.cz> <20160712161547.GB11020@thunk.org> <20160714131331.GB13151@quack2.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jan Kara , Theodore Ts'o , Eric Sandeen , Dave Chinner , fstests@vger.kernel.org, Ext4 Developers List , Shuichi Ihara , Li Xi , Wang Shilong To: Wang Shilong Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: fstests-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org On Fri 15-07-16 10:15:31, Wang Shilong wrote: > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 10:13 PM, Jan Kara wrote: > > On Tue 12-07-16 12:15:47, Ted Tso wrote: > > >> Does that sound like a plan? > > > > Yes. quotaoff will already disable only enforcement for ext4 with hidden > > quota files so there's no need to change anything there. We just need to > > add kernel support for enabling quota enforcement based on mount option. > > Attached patch should do that - I still need to test whether it doesn't > > break anything so don't apply it yet, just have a look whether it looks > > sane to you. > > I sent a similar patch weeks ago. > http://marc.info/?l=linux-ext4&m=146787897927183&w=2 Your patch was actually quite different. It did implement prjquota option but the option did something else than in my patch... In your patch you implemented prjquota option to match the behavior of original quota in normal files. In my patch I've implemented behavior of prjquota option to behave similarly as in XFS - i.e. enable enforcement of project quotas when project quota feature is enabled. Honza -- Jan Kara SUSE Labs, CR