On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 12:15:11PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote: > On 2009-09-06, at 03:25, Andreas Dilger wrote: > >in addition to the data-in-dirent INCOMPAT flag Rahul sent the patches > >for last week, I would like to ensure that we also have the INCOMPAT > >flag for large EA-in-inode flag reserved. This patch is going into > >testing at one of our large customers, and I want to make sure that > >we don't accidentally get a conflicting INCOMPAT flag assignment. > > > >#define EXT4_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_EA_INODE 0x0400 > >#define EXT4_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_DIRDATA 0x1000 > > > >#define EXT4_EA_INODE_FL 0x00200000 /* Inode uses large EA */ > > > Hi Ted, > I noticed Aneesh proposing to use the 0x0400 INCOMPAT flag for the > NFSv4 ACL support, but this conflicts with the large EA feature we > had previously discussed. We now have a couple of customers using > the large EA feature at this point, and I wouldn't want to break > their filesystem as a result of an avoidable conflict. > > I'll attach patches for this, which will hopefully make it easier, > and the patch tracking tool will keep this visible. > > Aneesh, maybe you can use 0x0800 for the INCOMPAT_RICHACL? > > I have updated richacl patches to use 0x0800. -aneesh -- 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
