On Wed, 2007-10-24 at 12:22 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > > > @@ -1279,6 +1280,9 @@ clear_qf_name: > > case Opt_delalloc: > > set_opt (sbi->s_mount_opt, DELALLOC); > > break; > > If delalloc, mballoc, extents are the new defaults, is there a reason to > keep them as options? When would you need to specify -o extents, now, > for example? > For extents, personally I think we should make it default for ext4 and remove this option. But as far as I rememember, from one of prevous the ext4 meeting, it was decided to make extents as default for ext4dev, but for ext4 it was undecided. For delayed allocation, before we have ordered mode support, we can't make it default and still need this option. > (though my brain is fuzzy today, maybe I'm missing > something) If this were not a filesystem ending in "dev" I could see > keeping it for compatibility with existing fstabs.... > > > + case Opt_nodelalloc: > > + clear_opt (sbi->s_mount_opt, DELALLOC); > > + break; > > case Opt_mballoc: > > set_opt(sbi->s_mount_opt, MBALLOC); > > break; > > @@ -1824,6 +1828,8 @@ static int ext4_fill_super (struct super_block *sb, void *data, int silent) > > * User -o noextents to turn it off > > */ > > I'd either update this comment ^^^^ or remove it, I think. > > > set_opt(sbi->s_mount_opt, EXTENTS); > > + set_opt(sbi->s_mount_opt, DELALLOC); > > + set_opt(sbi->s_mount_opt, MBALLOC); > > > > if (!parse_options ((char *) data, sb, &journal_inum, &journal_devnum, > > NULL, 0)) > > - > 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 - 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
