On 12/18/2012 12:49 AM, Miao Xie wrote:
On tue, 18 Dec 2012 15:30:51 +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 11:13:25PM -0800, clinew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
From: Wade Cline<clinew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
v1 -> v2:
- Added Signed-off-by tag (it's kind of important).
This patch is only an RFC. My internship is ending and I was hoping
to get some feedback and incorporate any suggestions people may
have before my internship ends along with life as we know it (this
Friday).
The filesystem should mount/umount properly but tends towards the
explosive side when writes start happening. My current focus is on
checksumming issues and also an error when releasing extent buffers
when creating a large file with 'dd'... and probably any other
method. There's still a significant amount of work that needs to be
done before this should be incorporated into mainline.
A couple of notes:
- Based off of Josef's btrfs-next branch, commit
8d089a86e45b34d7bc534d955e9d8543609f7e42
- C99-style comments are "meta-comments" where I'd like more
feedback; they aren't permanent but make 'checkpatch' moan.
- extent_buffer allocation and freeing need their code paths
merged; they're currently in separate functions and are both
very ugly.
- The patch itself will eventually need to be broken down
into smaller pieces if at all possible...
Could you please first elaborate why we need this subpagesize stuff and
any user case in this patch's commit log?
Or Am I missing something?
It is used on the machines on which the page size is larger than 4KB (Such as powerpc)
Thanks
Miao
Yeah. Basically, if we create a btrfs filesystem with a 4k blocksize
then that filesystem is incompatible with architectures such as PowerPC
and MIPS which have a page size larger than 4k.
-Wade
--
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
