[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150525080133.GD2387@quack.suse.cz>
Date: Mon, 25 May 2015 10:01:33 +0200
From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To: Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] libext2fs: Support for orphan file feature
On Fri 22-05-15 15:59:19, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On May 22, 2015, at 5:28 AM, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> wrote:
> > diff --git a/lib/ext2fs/ext2_fs.h b/lib/ext2fs/ext2_fs.h
> > index a755cfac8eae..a77c8fa09938 100644
> > --- a/lib/ext2fs/ext2_fs.h
> > +++ b/lib/ext2fs/ext2_fs.h
> > @@ -52,6 +52,7 @@
> > #define EXT2_JOURNAL_INO 8 /* Journal inode */
> > #define EXT2_EXCLUDE_INO 9 /* The "exclude" inode, for snapshots */
> > #define EXT4_REPLICA_INO 10 /* Used by non-upstream feature */
> > +#define EXT4_ORPHAN_INO 9 /* Inode with orphan entries */
>
> This still has a problem here, and can't be safely landed until it is
> resolved. At a minimum, it shouldn't be possible to create a filesystem
> with COMPAT_ORPHAN_FILE at the same time as COMPAT_EXCLUDE_BITMAP. Since
> EXCLUDE_BITMAP never made it upstream, that might be a reasonable
> compromise for now.
Yeah, for now I've chosen inode number 9 as for testing it's good enough.
We can make this feature incompatible with COMPAT_EXCLUDE_BITMAP as you
suggest or we can use some higher inode number and require increased number
of reserved inodes. I don't mind either too much.
> That said, we still need to do something about the lack of reserved inodes.
Agreed. I've tried to get some decision from Ted regarding this a few times
but failed.
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
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