On 9/20/14 3:46 PM, TR Reardon wrote:
> resize2fs seems to come up with some crazy default stride numbers.
> This occurs with and without bigalloc.
>
>
> I was testing enabling/disabling 64bit using latest patches from DJW,
> and noticed that s_raid_stride was being written with nonsensical
> values, in particular determine_fs_stride() is coming up with overly
> large values. The code is old (2006) and lacks comment so I'm not
> sure what the intended operation is. Does this just need to be
> updated for flex_bg? Should s_raid_stride ever be auto-changed on
> resize? If it should change, should stripe also change?
That old commit says:
+ In addition, add code so that resize2fs can automatically
+ determine the RAID stride parameter that had been
+ previously used on the filesystem.
but a year later, in 2007, this:
commit 96c6a3acd377698cb99ffd9925bec9b20ca4f6f9
Author: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri May 18 22:06:53 2007 -0400
Store the RAID stride value in the superblock and take advantage of it
stored it properly in the superblock (this hit e2fsprogs-1.40).
So maybe the whole heuristic could just be removed now, but from a simple
test, it's working here.
What was the geometry (dumpe2fs -h) of your filesystem before the resize?
-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
