Re: [PATCH] [RFC v2] Btrfs: Subpagesize blocksize (WIP).

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 02:26:50PM -0800, Wade Cline wrote:
> 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
> 

I'm just saying there _should_ be some kind of such description about
the patch in your commit log...

That's for those who don't ever know the background of the idea.

thanks,
liubo
--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux