Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751456AbWCPV0h (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Mar 2006 16:26:37 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752194AbWCPV0h (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Mar 2006 16:26:37 -0500 Received: from thunk.org ([69.25.196.29]:8835 "EHLO thunker.thunk.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750845AbWCPV0h (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Mar 2006 16:26:37 -0500 Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 16:26:32 -0500 From: "Theodore Ts'o" To: Takashi Sato , cmm@us.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Laurent Vivier Subject: Re: [Ext2-devel] [PATCH 1/2] ext2/3: Support 2^32-1 blocks(Kernel) Message-ID: <20060316212632.GA21004@thunk.org> Mail-Followup-To: Theodore Ts'o , Takashi Sato , cmm@us.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Laurent Vivier References: <000301c6482d$7e5b5200$4168010a@bsd.tnes.nec.co.jp> <1142475556.3764.133.camel@dyn9047017067.beaverton.ibm.com> <02bc01c648f2$bd35e830$4168010a@bsd.tnes.nec.co.jp> <20060316183549.GK30801@schatzie.adilger.int> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060316183549.GK30801@schatzie.adilger.int> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060126 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tytso@thunk.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on thunker.thunk.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2002 Lines: 40 On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 11:35:49AM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote: > Beyond that, we need a format change and may as well have something > like extents, but even extents still need to allow a larger i_blocks, As a side note, one of the things that we've been talking about doing is bundling a number of small changes together into a single INCOMPAT flag. Changing i_blocks so its units are in blocks rather than 512-byte sectors was one such change. Another was guaranteeing that for large inodes (> 128 bytes) that at least some number of bytes (probably on the order of 32 bytes or so) would be reserved for things like the high resolution portion of ctime/mtime/atime, high watermark, and other inode extensions. (One of the problems with doing high res timestamps right is how to handle the case where you can't make room for the high res timestamps, due to too much space being taken up by extended attributes. The make(1) program gets really confused unless all files are either using or not using high res timestamps.) The idea was to do a quick easy strike of all of the ideas which could be implemented quickly, and perhaps try to get them done before RHEL 5 snapshots. Even if RHEL5 doesn't enable use of these features by default, having it supported by RHEL5 would be extremely convenient. > so that patch would be useful in any case... though it needs some > cleanup to remove all users of i_frag and i_faddr (which have never > ever been used). One of the things which we need to consider is whether we think we will never support tail packing or other forms of fragments, which is related to whether we think we will ever support large blocks (i.e., 32k, 64k, and up). If we do, we might want to keep those fields around. - Ted - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/