Re: [LSF/MM TOPIC] Drop ext2/ext3 codebase? When?

[Ted Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>]

On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 11:32:01AM -0800, Michael Rubin wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 7:08 AM, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> wrote:
> > If we can have a real plan for moving in this direction though, I'd
> > support it.  I'm just not sure how we get enough real testing under
> > our belts to be comfortable with dropping ext[23], especially as
> > most distros now default to ext4 anyway.
> 
> Eric what sort of testing are you looking for?

The biggest problem in my opinion is that we have a large set of
options, and we don't necessarily test all of them.  The options that
I normaly test is

   * 4k blocksize, with journal, extents
   * 1k blocksize, with journal, extents (this helps flush out problems
		   that show up architectures with 16k page size and
		   4k block sizes, i.e., Power PC and Itanium)
   * 4k blocksize, no journal

Things that I should also test, but which take a lot longer:

   * nodelalloc (and combinatorics, 4k/1k blocksize, journal)
   * filesystem with extents disabled (with more combinatorics!)

I'll sometimes do these additional tests, but they're not part of my
regular test sets.

						- Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html