[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130503065304.GB32297@thunk.org>
Date: Fri, 3 May 2013 02:53:04 -0400
From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To: Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca>
Cc: Lukáš Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>,
"linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: Reserve FEATURE_RO_COMPAT and INO flag
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 12:35:18PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
>
> One real problem that I see is that EXT4_REPLICA_INO uses the
> last reserved inode. I recall in the past that Ted wanted to
> make this last reserved inode a hidden directory, so that it
> would be possible to put special inodes in there and access them
> by name. Not quite as easy as accessing a reserved inode by
> number, but still preferable to not being able to have filesystem
> internal inodes at all in the future.
That wasn't my idea, but it's not a bad one. I'm not too worried
about running out of file system internal inodes, though. There are
two main benefits of having special inode numbers. First, it's a low
numbered inode, so it's easy to recognize. Second, it's easier to add
a new file system feature to an existing file system. But either way,
it's not impossible.
First of all, "the first non-reserved inode" is actually a superblock
field, so we could actually change that for newer file systems, and
hence effectively create new reserved inodes. Secondly, it's simple
enough just to use a superblock field to designate a particular inode
as being special. This is how we originally dealt with the journal
inode, after all.
Cheers,
- 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