linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] test-appliance: add new test configuration: ext4/lustre

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20170623214109.3kwtxj3owi4noxda@thunk.org>
Date:   Fri, 23 Jun 2017 17:41:09 -0400
From:   Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To:     Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca>
Cc:     Artem Blagodarenko <artem.blagodarenko@...gate.com>,
        Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] test-appliance: add new test configuration:
 ext4/lustre_mds

On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 03:00:56PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> 
> I didn't include large_dir because it isn't included in the upstream
> kernels yet, and we haven't been using this in production due to lack
> of e2fsck support (which Seagate has finally implemented, thank you).

Also, does Lustre use large_dir on the MDS server, or on the Lustre
data server?  Because I noticed that on the MDS server you're
apparently not using extents:

export EXT_MKFS_OPTIONS="-I 2048 -O ^64bit,mmp,uninit_bg,^extents,dir_nlink,...
                                                         ^^^^^^^^

Are you really using large_dir on a file system that is using indirect
block mapped files?

						- Ted