Andreas Dilger writes: > > As a side note, online resize and inode zeroing are "dual". > > > > In order to obtain a filesystem with faster formating times one can > > do: > > . either format a smaller fs and then resize it, > > . or format the fs with lazy_itable_init > > As discussed on the concall, it probably makes more sense to have the > resize code work by marking the inode tables UNINIT (if GDT_CSUM feature > is enabled) If I understand correctly, this is already the case: #define EXT4_BG_INODE_UNINIT 0x0001 /* Inode table/bitmap not in use */ #define EXT4_BG_BLOCK_UNINIT 0x0002 /* Block bitmap not in use */ #define EXT4_BG_INODE_ZEROED 0x0004 /* On-disk itable initialized to zero */ As the EXT4_BG_INODE_ZEROED is not present, the inode table is UNINIT. By the way, is there any reason the #defines are like this, instead of: #define EXT4_BG_INODE_UNINIT 0x0001 /* Inode table/bitmap not in use */ #define EXT4_BG_BLOCK_UNINIT 0x0002 /* Block bitmap not in use */ #define EXT4_BG_ITABLE_UNINIT 0x0004 /* On-disk itable not initialized */ ? > and then start the "itable zeroing" thread, if it isn't > already running, to do the zeroing of the itable. Yes. Is there other resize changes you could think of? While working on this, I noted this checkpatch error "ERROR: do not use assignment in if condition" (but I am not sure of the exact justification). Thanks, -- solofo -- 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
