On Fri, 2007-04-20 at 18:14 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > On Apr 20, 2007 12:10 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> >> If ext3 can do 16T, ext2 probably should be able to as well.
> >> There are still "int" block containers in the block allocation path
> >> that need to be fixed up.
> >
> > Yeah, but who wants to do 16TB e2fsck on every boot? I think there
> > needs to be some limits imposed for the sake of usability.
>
> I figure this is in the fine tradition of "enough rope to hang oneself"
>
> If you have 16T of filesystem you probably know enough to not hang
> yourself this way.
>
> *shrug*
>
> It's a bug, today.
They are fixed in mm tree, as part of the patches which backports ext3
block reservation code to ext2. filesystem block numbers are all
ext2_fsblk_t type(i.e. unsigned long)(see ext2_new_blocks()). Maybe need
a round of thorough review to see if anything left, but I think what in
mm tree looks good.
And those patches in mm tree also backports the ext3 best-effort
allocates multiple blocks code (allocate multiple blocks within the
block reservation window as much as possible), FYI.
Mingming
> If we need another change to limit ext2 to 500G or
> something, fine by me. :)
>
> -Eric
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
