On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 12:34:01PM +0800, Liu Bo wrote: > On 03/09/2012 12:25 PM, Daniel J Blueman wrote: > > When testing out 16KB blocks with direct I/O [1] on 3.3-rc6, we > > quickly see btrfs_search_slot returning positive numbers, popping an > > assertion [2]. > > > > Are >4KB block sizes known broken for now? > > Yes, exactly, the kernel side is not ready for >4K block size, but AFAIK it _is_ on going. This is connected rather to PAGE_SIZE and PAGE_CACHE_SIZE, which happens to be 4k on x86_64, but eg. ia64 or powerpc64 are happy with 64k blocks (leaf and node). david -- 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
