On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 01:35:47AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > The test matrix of having to test everything on v4 and v5 is just > nasty, especially if we are talking about prototyping code. I'd much > prefer to bring things to v5 filesytsems where we have much lower > exposure and risk of corruption problems, and then when we know it's > solid because of the QA we've done on it, then we can expose the > majority of the XFS userbase to it by bringing it back to v4 > filesystems. I think the test matrix is a reason for not enabling this only on v5 filesystems. Large inodes are an old and supported use case, although probably not as heavily tested as it should. By introducing two different large inode cases we don't really help increasing test coverage for a code path that is the same for v4 and v5. That being said as long as you're still prototyping I'm not going to interfere. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
