Re: [PATCH v2 07/13] xfs: Introduce FORCEALIGN inode flag

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





So what about forcealign and RT?
Any opinion on this?
What about forcealign and RT?
In this series version I was mounting the whole FS as RO if
XFS_FEAT_FORCEALIGN and XFS_FEAT_REFLINK was found in the SB. And so very
different to how I was going to individual treat inodes which happen to be
forcealign and reflink, above.

So I was asking guidance when whether that approach (for RT and forcealign)
is sound.
I reiterate: don't allow mounting of (forcealign && reflink) or
(forcealign && rtextsize > 1) filesystems, and then you and I can work
on figuring out the rest.

I'm fine with that approach for forcealign && reflink (no mounting).

As for forcealign && rtextsize > 1 it seems to be working for me. That is with not too many changes, so maybe we can go with this support initially. Personally I'd rather not, as testing may be spread too thin. Anyway, I'll send the patches early next week and we can make the judgement then.







[Index of Archives]     [XFS Filesystem Development (older mail)]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Trails]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux