On May 22, 2007 15:45 -0400, Theodore Tso wrote: > On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 05:03:11PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote: > > A quick patch to sanity check the inode ratio vs the inode size. In some > > cases Lustre users have tried specifying an inode size of 4096 bytes, while > > keeping an inode ratio of one inode per 4096 bytes, causing mke2fs to spin > > forever trying to allocate the inode tables. I'm sure more people will do > > this now that large inodes are available in ext4 and documented in e2fsprogs. > > I can't replicate this. I'm guessing you are doing this with the > clusterfs codebase that has the extent patches? Mke2fs shouldn't be > spinning if it can't allocate the inode tables. Instead it should > print the error message: Hmm, I suppose it might be due to running this on a 2TB filesystem that is trying to allocate a huge number of inodes. It could also have been with an older version of mke2fs - it was a customer that reported the problem. I just happened to be poking in that bit of code recently and thought I'd add the sanity check. I don't think it relates to CFS patches, since we don't change mke2fs at all for the extent code. We can let it drop for now, until I have a reproducer. Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Principal Software Engineer Cluster File Systems, Inc. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
