From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [EXT4 set 2][PATCH 3/5] cleanups: set_jbd2_64bit_feature for >16TB ext4 fs Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 16:30:22 -0700 Message-ID: <20070710163022.333ece67.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <1183275392.4010.122.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org To: cmm@us.ibm.com Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1183275392.4010.122.camel@localhost.localdomain> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:36:32 -0400 Mingming Cao wrote: > Set the journals JBD2_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_64BIT on devices with more > than 32bit block sizes during mount time. This ensure proper record > lenth when writing to the journal. This patch isn't in Ted's kernel.org directory and hasn't been in -mm. Where did it come from? Is something amiss with ext4 patch management? > Signed-off-by: Jose R. Santos > Signed-off-by: Andreas Dilger > Signed-off-by: Mingming Cao > Signed-off-by: Laurent Vivier > --- > fs/ext4/super.c | 11 +++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+) > > Index: linux-2.6.22-rc4/fs/ext4/super.c > =================================================================== > --- linux-2.6.22-rc4.orig/fs/ext4/super.c 2007-06-11 16:15:54.000000000 -0700 > +++ linux-2.6.22-rc4/fs/ext4/super.c 2007-06-11 16:16:10.000000000 -0700 > @@ -1804,6 +1804,13 @@ Please prepare patches using `diff -p' > goto failed_mount3; > } > > + if (ext4_blocks_count(es) > 0xffffffffULL && > + !jbd2_journal_set_features(EXT4_SB(sb)->s_journal, 0, 0, > + JBD2_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_64BIT)) { > + printk(KERN_ERR "ext4: Failed to set 64-bit journal feature\n"); > + goto failed_mount4; > + } It is not appropriate for the text "ext4" to appear in a JBD2 message. > /* We have now updated the journal if required, so we can > * validate the data journaling mode. */ > switch (test_opt(sb, DATA_FLAGS)) {