On Jan 13, 2014, at 9:19 AM, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 09:06:45AM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote: >> I'm just not entirely sure it's worth the extra hair, either way. I'm >> curious to hear what other people think. > > After the ext4 concall this morning, I've been convinced by Carlos's > and Andreas' arguments that we should add a superblock at the end of > the disk. So I'll rework the patches to do that. Instead of adding a new location for the backup superblock at the "end" of the disk (which is subject to change if the filesystem is resized), what about using the last group that would otherwise have a backup superblock with the "sparse_super" feature? That means resizing the filesystem by some amount won't change the location of the backup, and avoids the need to change all of the documentation for how to find superblocks. Cheers, Andreas
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
