|To:||Brian Foster <bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx>|
|Subject:||Re: [PATCH 03/18] xfs: define sparse inode chunks v5 sb feature bit and helper function|
|From:||Mark Tinguely <tinguely@xxxxxxx>|
|Date:||Thu, 24 Jul 2014 13:38:07 -0500|
|References:||<1406211788-63206-1-git-send-email-bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx> <1406211788-63206-4-git-send-email-bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx> <53D13D94.9030607@xxxxxxx> <20140724173701.GD37832@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>|
|User-agent:||Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:9.0) Gecko/20120122 Thunderbird/9.0|
On 07/24/14 12:37, Brian Foster wrote:
On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 12:08:36PM -0500, Mark Tinguely wrote:On 07/24/14 09:22, Brian Foster wrote:The sparse inode chunks feature will use the helper function to enable the allocation of sparse inode chunks. The incompatible feature bit is set on disk once a sparse inode chunk is allocated to prevent older drivers from mounting an fs with sparse chunks. Note that the feature is hardcoded disabled and the feature bit not included in the all features mask until fully implemented. Signed-off-by: Brian Foster<bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx> ---Sorry if I missed it in the series but is there an XFS_FSOP_GEOM_FLAGS_SPINODES for xfs_info/growfs?Nope, looks like I missed it. It probably slipped my mind as I haven't got into userspace yet and thus hadn't thought about xfs_info. I'll make a note to add it, thanks! Brian
Again forgive my quick scanning of the series, but am I correct in thinking that this does not change the minimum number of reserved blocks for create like fs ops. The create/rename do some attempts to continue when it cannot get the full number of reserved blocks. Would allocating a sparse inode chunk make sense in that case? My gut says the complication does not.
Thanks again, --Mark.
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|
|Previous by Date:|
|Next by Date:||[PATCH] xfsprogs: fix typo in mkfs.xfs, Mark Tinguely|
|Previous by Thread:|
|Next by Thread:|
|Indexes:||[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]|