xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: XFS and LBD patch on 2.4.20 or 2.4.22

To: Gustavo Rincon <grincon@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: XFS and LBD patch on 2.4.20 or 2.4.22
From: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 08:03:56 +1100
Cc: "'linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx'" <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <E923357F2279D411B9F500508BAEE83702A4CC05@hqntex1.ciprico.com>
References: <E923357F2279D411B9F500508BAEE83702A4CC05@hqntex1.ciprico.com>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.3i
hi there,

On Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 02:43:06PM -0600, Gustavo Rincon wrote:
> Hi guys, I have a XFS 1.3.1 version compile on linux kernel-2.4.20 (Red Hat
> version) and kernel-2.4.22 (Vanilla) and 
> i was wonder what changes I have to do to xfsprogs in order to create and
> support filesystem greater than 2 Terabytes.

None.

> The kernel that I compiled with the gelato LBD patch and I tested with EXT3
> and REISERFS on a MD device, the size of the Device is 2.7 Terabytes,
> and everything looks OKAY, but when i try to tested with XFS sometime after
> i perform xfs_repair some files are erased by the xfs_repair utility.  

There are changes in this area in CVS - could you try a current
CVS kernel.  Also, can you describe your tests in detail, and if
the problem reproducible for you?  (if so, hopefully it is for me
too, so I can fix it ;)

> All this testing was done in a PENTIUM 4 XEION and gcc (GCC) 3.2 20020903
> (Red Hat Linux 8.0 3.2-7) to compile the Kernel and the xfsprogs.
> 
> The xfsprogs utility  (2.5.6) was compiled with the xfs_types.h file
> modified (The XFS_BIG_FILESYSTEMS #define was turned ON).

Thats unnecessary - it is always "on" during an xfsprogs build;
see xfsprogs/include/builddefs.in.

> Do I have to compile the xfsprogs using or modifying more #defines? 

No.

cheers.

-- 
Nathan


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>