On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 07:52:41AM +0800, Coly Li wrote:
> On 2011年07月31日 15:08, Joel Becker Wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 03:25:32PM +0800, Coly Li wrote:
> >> And in non-journal mode, there is not copy of any meta data block in jbd2, we need to be
> >> more careful in check summing, e.g. inode/block bitmap blocks...
> >
> > Sure, but you could use a trigger in journaled mode and then do
> > the checksums directly in the __ext4_handle_journal_dirty_*() functions
> > in non-journaled mode. Sure, it would be a little more CPU time, but
> > the user picked "checksums + no journal" at mkfs time.
> >
>
> Yes, my idea was similar to you.
> One thing not clear to me is, in non-journal mode, how to make the page of bitmap block being stable. Because bits
> setting in Ext4 bitmap is non-locking, it might be possible that new bit setting after check sum is calculated.
Every place that changes the bits will eventually call
ext4_journal_dirty(), which recalculates the checksum. So there's no
danger of a set-bit-after-last-checksum. But you will have to lock
around the checksum calculation in non-journaling mode. JBD2 handles it
for journaling mode.
Joel
--
"The whole principle is wrong; it's like demanding that grown men
live on skim milk because the baby can't eat steak."
- author Robert A. Heinlein on censorship
http://www.jlbec.org/
jlbec@xxxxxxxxxxxx
--
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
