[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F5A1E4A.9060804@ubuntu.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 10:14:18 -0500
From: Phillip Susi <psusi@...ntu.com>
To: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>
CC: Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>,
ext4 development <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: mkfs.ext4 vs. e2fsck discard oddities
On 3/9/2012 3:59 AM, Lukas Czerner wrote:
> Why would we try to check UNINIT groups with valid descriptor checksums
> ? I think that this problem will be solved with BLOCK_DISCARDED flag as
> we discussed with Ted in another thread. No need to have yet another
> option so it is win-win :)
Because not skipping a specific action on an uninitialized group (
discard ) is a specific case of the more general form of not skipping
uninitialized groups. I thought that it might sometimes be useful to
actually verify the group is correct instead of trusting the uninit
flag, especially if you are about to discard it. Also any other things
that are added in the future and skipped for uninit groups would not
need yet another flag to specifically not skip that action, since it
will be covered by the more general flag already.
Also the way the code was structured it looked like it would be much
simpler to bypass the skip and do the full check of the uninit group
than to modify it to discard the group even though checking it was skipped.
--
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