Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Sep 24, 2008 12:53 -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>> @@ -514,8 +514,10 @@ static void ext4_put_super(struct super_block *sb)
>> + if (sbi->s_proc) {
>> + remove_proc_entry("inode_readahead_bits", sbi->s_proc);
>> remove_proc_entry(sb->s_id, ext4_proc_root);
>
> As a general UI interface, specifying the "bits to shift the filesystem
> block number" seems like an easy-to-implement but is fairly bad from
> a usability point of view. I'd much prefer to specify this as a
> number of kB to readahead, and it can be converted internally to the
> number of blocks to readahead. It isn't fatal if we do a bit of rounding
> on the input value to match a full blocksize.
Or specify that it must be a power of two in some range, and reject
other values - either way.
I had the same thought about the nr of bits as a user input value...
-Eric
--
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
