[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4537A1FB.6030601@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 11:04:11 -0500
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
To: Andreas Dilger <adilger@...sterfs.com>
CC: ext4 development <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] - make ext3 more robust in the face of filesystem
corruption
Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Oct 18, 2006 16:56 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> Andreas Dilger wrote:
>>> The directory leaf data is kept in
>>> the page cache and there is a helper function ext2_check_page() to mark
>>> the page "checked". That means the page only needs to be checked once
>>> after being read from disk, instead of each time through readdir.
>> ah, sure. Hm... well, this might be a bit of a performance hit if it's
>> checking cached data... let me think on that.
>
> Well, having something like "ext3_dir_bread()" that verifies the leaf block
> once if (!uptodate()) would be almost the same as ext2 with fairly little
> effort. It would help performance in several places, at the slight risk
> of not handling in-memory corruption after the block is read...
How about just tweaking the existing ext3_bread so that it lets the
caller know whether or not it found an uptodate buffer? Seems
conceivable that more than just the dir code might want to do a data
sanity check, based on if this is a fresh read or not.
Could maybe even change the *err argument to a *retval; negative on
errors, else 0 == not read (found uptodate), 1 == fresh read (not found
uptodate). Or is that too much overloading...
-Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists