[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080403092858.5e3a7bb2@gara.konoha.net>
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 09:28:58 -0500
From: "Jose R. Santos" <jrs@...ibm.com>
To: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
Cc: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][e2fsprogs] New bitmap and inode table allocation for
FLEX_BG
On Thu, 3 Apr 2008 09:12:40 -0400
Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 10:13:11PM -0500, Jose R. Santos wrote:
> > From: Jose R. Santos <jrs@...ibm.com>
> >
> > New bitmap and inode table allocation for FLEX_BG
> >
> > Change the way we allocate bitmaps and inode tables if the FLEX_BG
> > feature is used at mke2fs time. It places calculates a new offset for
> > bitmaps and inode table base on the number of groups that the user
> > wishes to pack together using the new "-G" option. Creating a
> > filesystem with 64 block groups in a flex group can be done by:
>
> I was just testing out this patch, and it looks like it creates a
> filesystem with an incorrect free blocks count when creating a
> filesystem with both uninit_groups and flex_bg. Can you look at this,
> please?
>
> - Ted
I blame Undo Manager for being so slow that cause me to skip some of
the testing needed to be done. I was incorrectly checking the feature
flag instead of checking the value of fs->super->s_log_groups_per_flex.
Fixed patch is on its way.
-JRS
--
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