From: Valerie Clement Subject: Re: ext4 compat flag assignments Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2006 15:33:53 +0200 Message-ID: <45265B41.6090006@bull.net> References: <20060922091520.GC6335@schatzie.adilger.int> <20060928085515.GC27104@openx1.frec.bull.fr> <20061004200440.GB1656@thunk.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Andreas Dilger , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from ecfrec.frec.bull.fr ([129.183.4.8]:3523 "EHLO ecfrec.frec.bull.fr") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1422689AbWJFNfN (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Oct 2006 09:35:13 -0400 To: Theodore Tso In-Reply-To: <20061004200440.GB1656@thunk.org> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org Theodore Tso wrote: > On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 10:55:15AM +0200, Alexandre Ratchov wrote: >> struct ext4_super_block >> { >> /* at offset 0xfe */ >> __le32 s_desc_size; /* Group descriptor size */ >> /* at offset 0x150 */ >> __le32 s_blocks_count_hi; /* Blocks count */ >> __le32 s_r_blocks_count_hi; /* Reserved blocks count */ >> __le32 s_free_blocks_count_hi; /* Free blocks count */ >> __le32 s_jnl_blocks_hi[17]; /* Backup of the journal inode */ >> }; >=20 > Why do we need to have the high blocks # of the journal inode. > s_jnl_blocks was just a backup of the i_blocks[] array. But if we ar= e > assuming that we will only support 64-bits using extents, we shouldn'= t > need s_jnl_blocks_hi[]. How specifically is this array being used in > the patches? The s_jnl_blocks_hi[] array is not used in the current patchset. Alexandre wanted to reserve these fields for a future use, for instance= =20 to support larger inode sizes. As we'll not use them in the short term and we'll still need to think=20 about that, you can remove this array. Regards, Val=E9rie - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html