Ken McDonell wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Dec 2000, Rajagopal Ananthanarayanan wrote:
>
> > Ken McDonell wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, 5 Dec 2000, Russell Cattelan wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hiroshi Aono wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > I tried to run XFS on IA64, but kernel panic occurs.
> > >
> > > The page size on IA64 is unlikely to be 4K bytes, so this already in
> > > potentially dangerous territory.
> > >
> >
> > We don't really have any manifest constants in XFS tied to 4K, AFAICT.
> > The only restriction is that blocksize is tied to PAGE_SIZE &
> > PAGE_CACHE_SIZE ... both of which should be same for a given ARCH.
Well since 8k pages have shown to be a problem; ie ye old 1024k sb
I'm guessing that the 16k pages will give a problem.
Actually I'm curious to see if the sb writes are 2048k?!
Does somebody have an alpha set up that I could log into and
try adding some printks.
>
>
> Good, that is better than I had understood the situation to be.
>
> Warning: following question based on ignorance.
>
> Will mkfs by default choose a blocksize that satisifies the
> "restriction is that blocksize is tied to PAGE_SIZE &
> PAGE_CACHE_SIZE"?
>
> And what _exactly_ does this restriction mean, given the semantic
> imprecision of "tied to"?
>
> > Internally we had tried XFS on IA64 about 3 months back.
> > At that time some things were functional and the instability
> > mostly came from the hardware ...
|