On 5/25/22 12:36 AM, Chandan Babu R wrote:
> From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Currently, the two V5 feature upgrades permitted by xfs_repair do not
> affect filesystem space usage, so we haven't needed to verify the
> geometry.
>
> However, this will change once we start to allow the sysadmin to add new
> metadata indexes to existing filesystems. Add all the infrastructure we
> need to ensure that the log will still be large enough, that there's
> enough space for metadata space reservations, and the root inode will
> still be where we expect it to be after the upgrade.
>
> Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Chandan Babu R <chandan.babu@xxxxxxxxxx>
> [Recompute transaction reservation values; Exit with error if upgrade fails]
This is a lot to digest; I'd like to go ahead and merge 3 patches out of
this 5 patch series and leave this + the upgrade patch until I get a chance
to digest it a bit more.
One thing at least, though:
> + /*
> + * Would we have at least 10% free space in the data device after all
> + * the upgrades?
> + */
> + if (mp->m_sb.sb_fdblocks < mp->m_sb.sb_dblocks / 10)
> + printf(_("Filesystem will be low on space after upgrade.\n"));
> +
This should be removed, IMHO; what is the point? The user can't do anything about
it, it proceeds anyway, and for all we know they started with less than 10% free.
So why bother printing something that might generate questions and support
calls? I don't think it's useful or actionable information.
Thanks,
-Eric
