[Ocfs2-tools-devel] Patch for journal truncate of ocfs2-tools.

[tao.ma]

Sunil Mushran wrote:
>> From the code it seems that we used to make the journal size smaller 
>> only under the condition that we change the numbers of slots, so here we 
>> have the check of "if (!opts.num_slots)". But now we can decrease the 
>> journal size without touching the number of slots, so we shouldn't care 
>> whether we change num_slots or not. Am I wrong? Please point it out.
>>     
>
> The code used to handle the situation in which the user extends the
> journal size and adds slots at the same time. The current code cannot
> handle that.
>
> Again, I am ok with making the two ops exclusive. As in, disallow
> changing slots and changing journal files at the same time. It may make
> life easier both coding/testing wise and not take much from the user.
>   
Sorry for not reading the code clearly about the process of changing 
num_slots.
First paste the original code here:

		if (opts.jrnl_size > def_jrnl_size)
 			printf("Changing journal size %"PRIu64" to %"PRIu64"\n",
 			       def_jrnl_size, opts.jrnl_size);
 		else {
			if (!opts.num_slots) {
				com_err(opts.progname, 0, "Journal size %"PRIu64" "
					"has to be larger " "than %"PRIu64"",
					opts.jrnl_size, def_jrnl_size);
				goto unlock;
			}
 		}
 	

The code is used for an additional check of journal_size. When the user 
want to change num_slots, tunefs will set jrnl_size equals to the 
default size, so that here may meet with the situation "opts.jrnl_size 
== def_jrnl_size" and it should't be an error. During the following 
steps, update_slots will add the nodes and update_journal_size will do 
the work of filling the new journal files with the journal header.
Now as we can decrease the journal size, all the possible values of 
opts.jrnl_size is right. So I removed the com_err completely.
As for extending the journal size and adding slots at the same time, I 
think they can coexist with each other, since we will add the slots and 
fill the journal file later.
Attached is the new patch. Please review.

-------------- next part --------------
Index: libocfs2/mkjournal.c
===================================================================
--- libocfs2/mkjournal.c	(revision 1346)
+++ libocfs2/mkjournal.c	(working copy)
@@ -301,6 +301,19 @@ errcode_t ocfs2_make_journal(ocfs2_files
 		ret = ocfs2_write_inode(fs, blkno, (char *)di);
 		if (ret)
 			goto out;
+	} else if (clusters < di->i_clusters) {
+		uint64_t new_size = clusters <<
+			   OCFS2_RAW_SB(fs->fs_super)->s_clustersize_bits;
+		ret = ocfs2_truncate(fs, blkno, new_size);
+		if (ret)
+			goto out;
+
+		ocfs2_free_cached_inode(fs, ci);
+		ret = ocfs2_read_cached_inode(fs, blkno, &ci);
+		if (ret) {
+			ci = NULL;
+			goto out;
+		}
 	}
 
 	ret = ocfs2_format_journal(fs, ci);
Index: tunefs.ocfs2/tunefs.c
===================================================================
--- tunefs.ocfs2/tunefs.c	(revision 1346)
+++ tunefs.ocfs2/tunefs.c	(working copy)
@@ -976,7 +976,7 @@ static errcode_t update_journal_size(ocf
 		}
 
 		di = (struct ocfs2_dinode *)buf;
-		if (num_clusters <= di->i_clusters)
+		if (num_clusters == di->i_clusters)
 			continue;
 
 		printf("Updating %s...  ", jrnl_file);
@@ -1445,17 +1445,9 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
 		opts.jrnl_size = num_clusters <<
 				OCFS2_RAW_SB(fs->fs_super)->s_clustersize_bits;
 
-		if (opts.jrnl_size > def_jrnl_size)
+		if (opts.jrnl_size != def_jrnl_size)
 			printf("Changing journal size %"PRIu64" to %"PRIu64"\n",
 			       def_jrnl_size, opts.jrnl_size);
-		else {
-			if (!opts.num_slots) {
-				com_err(opts.progname, 0, "Journal size %"PRIu64" "
-					"has to be larger " "than %"PRIu64"",
-					opts.jrnl_size, def_jrnl_size);
-				goto unlock;
-			}
-		}
 	}
 
 	/* validate volume size */