[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070711221425.GH19456@thunk.org>
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 18:14:25 -0400
From: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
To: "Jose R. Santos" <jrs@...ibm.com>
Cc: Andreas Dilger <adilger@...sterfs.com>,
"linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Initial results of FLEX_BG feature.
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 12:30:04AM -0500, Jose R. Santos wrote:
> Right now what I've done is allocate the bitmaps and inode tables at the
> beginning of each group of 64 BG. Still need to work on fsck since just
> removing the restriction on were the bitmaps and inode table are
> located still gives me errors of uninitialized inodes with dtime set.
> Seems like fsck still expect inode information to be located at
> specific locations within the disk.
Can you send me the patch which you were playing with? I might be
able to help you with this. It should be pretty straightforward to
remove the constraint on the inode table location.
It really should only be a check in e2fsck/super.c:check_super_block(),
as far as I know.
If you're seeing errors of unitialized inodes with dtime set, that
sounds like maybe something else is going on. All of e2fsprogs should
be referencing the inode table via fs->group_desc[group_num].bg_inode_table.
See lib/ext2fs/inode.c, functions ext2fs_open_inode_scan(),
get_next_blockgroup(), and ext2fs_read_inode_full().
- 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