Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 09:57:18 -0500 From: "Josh Carroll" <josh.carroll@gmail.com> To: "Kostik Belousov" <kostikbel@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: ext2 inode size patch - RE: PR kern/124621 Message-ID: <8cb6106e0811250657q6fdf08b0x1e94f35fd0a7ed4f@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20081125142827.GI2042@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> References: <8cb6106e0811241129o642dcf28re4ae177c8ccbaa25@mail.gmail.com> <20081125140601.GH2042@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <8cb6106e0811250617q5fffb41exe20dfb8314fc4a9d@mail.gmail.com> <20081125142827.GI2042@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I do not suggest testing. I suggest understand what inode metadata is stored > in the added 128 bytes and evaluate whether this information can be ignored > without dangerous consequences for filesystem consistency or user data. > Well, to be clear I didn't just double the size of the inode table. It is dynamically determined based on the data structure. I'm not a file system expert (to call me a novice would probably be stretching it), so I'm hoping someone more versed can chime in. All the code does is query the data structure (specifically, the s_inode_size field of the structure) and use that value instead of blindly assuming an inode size of 128. I don't think it's a matter of what is done with the extra bits, since it's just querying the size of an already created filesystem. Thanks, Josh
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8cb6106e0811250657q6fdf08b0x1e94f35fd0a7ed4f>