[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071104005208.GA6455@thunk.org>
Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2007 20:52:08 -0400
From: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
To: "Jose R. Santos" <jrs@...ibm.com>
Cc: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4][e2fsprogs] New bitmap and inode table allocation
for FLEX_BG
On Mon, Aug 13, 2007 at 11:33:14PM -0500, Jose R. Santos wrote:
> + if (EXT2_HAS_INCOMPAT_FEATURE (fs->super,
> + EXT4_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_FLEX_BG))
> + ext2fs_allocate_flex_groups(fs);
> +
> + else {
> + for (i = 0; i < fs->group_desc_count; i++) {
> + retval = ext2fs_allocate_group_table(fs, i, fs->block_map);
> + if (retval)
> + return retval;
> + }
The code to handle flex groups needs to be moved into
ext2fs_allocate_group_table(), and not put in
ext2fs_allocate_tables(), since resize2fs calls
ext2fs_allocate_group_table(), and we want resize2fs to do the right
thing for filesystems that have both the FLEX_BG and META_BG flags
set. Speaking of which, we need to fix the kernel on-line resizing
code to allocate new blocks for filesystem metadata blocks using the
new placement algorithm for FLEX_BG && META_BG filesystems.
I'll fix this up for the 'pu' branch of e2fsprogs, as well as making
ext2fs_allocate_flex_groups static, but I'm not going to graduate this
to the 'next' branch just yet, since it needs a bit more testing,
specifically with resize2fs.
- 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