From: Toshiyuki Okajima Subject: Re: [PATCH][BUG] ext4: dx_map_entry cannot support over 64KB block size Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:32:16 +0900 Message-ID: <4A404CC0.9050202@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20090605165049.e8bd9c74.toshi.okajima@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090605212000.GV9002@webber.adilger.int> <20090608163055.0eab9737.toshi.okajima@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090621035731.GA6719@mit.edu> <4A3EE269.3020704@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090622024757.GB26079@mit.edu> Reply-To: toshi.okajima@jp.fujitsu.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Andreas Dilger , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org To: Theodore Tso Return-path: Received: from fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.36]:48358 "EHLO fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751372AbZFWDcS (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jun 2009 23:32:18 -0400 Received: from m6.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.76]) by fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id n5N3WKvV002642 for (envelope-from toshi.okajima@jp.fujitsu.com); Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:32:20 +0900 Received: from smail (m6 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m6.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id B293445DE53 for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:32:19 +0900 (JST) Received: from s6.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s6.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.96]) by m6.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A87745DE51 for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:32:19 +0900 (JST) Received: from s6.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s6.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46447E08005 for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:32:19 +0900 (JST) Received: from m105.s.css.fujitsu.com (m105.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.105]) by s6.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 052041DB8038 for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:32:19 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: <20090622024757.GB26079@mit.edu> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Ted-san, Theodore Tso wrote: > Are you aware of any patches that enable an IA64 system to support a > page size greater than 64kB? (And whether any customer would actually > want to use them, given the downsides of very large page size?) The No, I am not. But I have considered that POWERPC system has been supported over 64KB page size after I examined all Kconfig's in kernel source. Therefore I thought this bug should be fixed in kernel side. > issue is that Linux doesn't support filesystem block sizes > than the > page size. In any case, I don't mind adding patches that attempt to > make it better to support large block sizes; I don't really want to > claim that we support it until we can actually fully test for that I think so, too. > feature, though. Is it your intent to actually try to provide support > for this at some point? I'll help you if you are, but you'll have to > do the testing, since I don't have access to an IA64 platform that > might be able to support these sorts of large pages. > > Thanks, > > - Ted I don't think this feature (over 64KB block size support) to be necessary immediately. Because I have been investigating ext4 for my customers in order that I may provide them greater quality and performance but they don't want it now. But when my customers want this feature, I will try to test it. Best regards, Toshiyuki Okajima