Re: [PATCH 1/8] e2fsprogs: Next3 on-disk format changes

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Andreas Dilger
Date: Monday, June 21, 2010 - 11:32 am

Amir Goldstein <amir73il@users.sf.net> wrote on 2010-05-05 18:28:49:


These should be added into the array in superblock offset order, rather than into the middle of the array.


These should be added into the array in feature number order, rather than into the middle of the array.


Same.
 

Same



These two fields were intended to hold the 32-bit checksum of the inode and block bitmaps for this group.  Also, a 32-bit block number is not sufficient for a filesystem larger than 2^32 blocks, and there is no way to extend this in the future to hold the full block number.


This field is already in use by NFS and Lustre, I don't think it is correct to re-use it.


Are all of these states mutually exclusive?  Can they legally all be set at the same time?


Cheers, Andreas

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [PATCH 1/8] e2fsprogs: Next3 on-disk format changes, Andreas Dilger, (Mon Jun 21, 11:32 am)