[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1180645773.3922.8.camel@garfield>
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2007 02:39:32 +0530
From: Kalpak Shah <kalpak@...sterfs.com>
To: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
Cc: linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
Andreas Dilger <adilger@...sterfs.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Multiple mount protection
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 12:16 -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 02:28:33AM +0530, Kalpak Shah wrote:
> >
> > So can I assume that the INCOMPAT_MMP flag and the s_mmp_interval and
> > s_mmp_block superblock fields will be reserved regardless of whether the
> > patches go into ext4? I had attached the patches in the last mail so you
> > can share your views on them.
>
> Yes, i've reserved the code point and superblock fields.
Thanks.
> I'm not going to add INCOMPAT_MMP flag to the supported file until I get and
> integrate the patch ext2fs_open() that actually tests for the flag,
> though, since that would be a bit silly.
>
> I assume the patch will add a flag to ext2fs_open which skips the MMP
> checking.
Yes I have added a EXT2_FLAG_SKIP_MMP flag to ext2fs_open() to bypass
MMP which will be set if tunefs is used with -f option. Also MMP check
will not be run if the filesystem is being opened readonly.
Thanks,
Kalpak.
> After all, tune2fs is allowed to make changes to the
> superblock while the filesystem is mounted. So it needs to be able to
> open the filesystem read/only even if it is mounted.
>
> Regards,
>
> - Ted
-
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