On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 8:37 PM, Josef Bacik <josef@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 08:32:12PM -0500, C Anthony Risinger wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 8:05 PM, Josef Bacik <josef@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 05:21:06PM -0500, Mitch Harder wrote: >> >> On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 5:09 PM, Diego Calleja <diegocg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> > On Jueves, 21 de Octubre de 2010 17:46:58 David Nicol escribió: >> >> >> Does this mixing constitute a forbidden change of on-disk format, and >> >> >> if not how not? >> >> > >> >> > It doesn't need a format change. The difference between a data and >> >> > a metadata block group is just an allocation hint AFAIK. >> >> > -- >> >> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in >> >> > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> >> > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> >> > >> >> >> >> Let me know if the problems with an un-patched kernel were un-expected. >> >> >> >> I can provide more information on the crash when booting an older kernel. >> > >> > Nope they are expected, it's not a disk format change, but older kernels won't >> > deal with mixed block groups. >> >> When something like this goes mainline, is it used by default/automatically? >> >> I ask because I maintain a btrfs-based rollback initramfs hook [1], >> and am currently updating it for extlinux, enabling kernel-level >> system rollbacks via `btrfs set-default` + reboot (or maybe >> `kexec`)... >> >> rolling back to an old kernel will then blow up my machine >> (figuratively of course :-)? >> > > The only way you get this feature is if you mkfs with the feature enabled, and > is only meant for small filesystems (1 gig or smaller). Ah right :-), thanks C Anthony -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
