From: Andreas Dilger Subject: Re: Updated ext4 patches for 2.6.18-rc6 Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2006 12:09:32 -0600 Message-ID: <20060908180931.GK6441@schatzie.adilger.int> References: <20060908131144sho@rifu.tnes.nec.co.jp> <1157698868.8616.20.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060908161324.GA19256@openx1.frec.bull.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Mingming Cao , akpm@osdl.org, shaggy@us.ibm.com, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from mail.clusterfs.com ([206.168.112.78]:55969 "EHLO mail.clusterfs.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751109AbWIHSJg (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Sep 2006 14:09:36 -0400 To: Alexandre Ratchov Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060908161324.GA19256@openx1.frec.bull.fr> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org On Sep 08, 2006 18:13 +0200, Alexandre Ratchov wrote: > there are 2 more patches: > > * ext4_remove_relative_block_numbers: > > use 48bit absolute block numbers instead of mixed relative/absolute block > numbers. This is simpler and seems to fix issues with large file systems. > > * ext4_allow_larger_descriptor_size: > > allow larger block group descriptors: this patch will allow to add new > features that need more space in the block descriptor. Hmm, I'm a bit confused. If we are adding larger block group descriptors, why wouldn't we put 32-bit "high" block numbers into the larger descriptor space? That could be part of the INCOMPAT_64BIT support. Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Principal Software Engineer Cluster File Systems, Inc.