On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 08:56:39AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 10:12:30AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 02:10:34PM -0500, Brian Foster wrote:
> > - kernel code seems to be regression from when not using sparse
> > inodes
> What regression are you referring to?
Doh! typo there. s/from/free/
> > - inode allocation speed does not seem to be impacted by sparse
> > inode allocation - running my fsmark tests on a debug kernel show
> > no performance differential, even though sparse inode chunks
> > should be created in that case.
> > - it smoke tests through xfstests ok
> I haven't really run into much for issues so far save for a problem
> discovered with the DEBUG mode code from my recent large block size
> testing. I have a patch for that lying around I need to post...
> > I haven't really looked through the userspace code in any detail,
> > so I can't really comment on that side of things yet. The kernel
> > code looks good, there doesn't appear to be any regressions and the
> > new functionailty works so far. Hence I think I'm going to merge
> > the kernel code in the 4.2 cycle, and we can work on getting
> > userspace into the current dev tree for people to test and use the
> > new code....
> Sounds good, thanks. The userspace bits have only been posted for
> testing purposes to this point to avoid the churn from active review of
> the core code. Since that is now merged, I'll get the latest mechanism
> ported over to userspace, incorporate some of the fixes noted above and
> get something posted hopefully soon.
Can you port it to the current dev branch (libxfs-4.1-update)? That
way will be much easier for you, and me when it comes to merging..