From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hans Reiser Subject: Re: Problems with journal size option on mkfs Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 19:15:24 +0400 Message-ID: <3CE3CD0C.2050504@namesys.com> References: <20020516190911.A2877@namesys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: Oleg Drokin Cc: Steve Pratt , reiserfs-list@namesys.com, Edward Shushkin Oleg Drokin wrote: >Hello! > >On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 09:59:46AM -0500, Steve Pratt wrote: > > > >>>This is because non-standard journal support is only included in 2.5 >>> >>> >>kernel >> >> >>>series. >>>2.4 support is available as separate patch for now. >>> >>> >>So just to be sure I understand this:the current 2.4 kernel code (2.4.18) >>does not include support for ANY non-standard journal options, including >>non default size of an inline log?? >> >> > >Yes, this is correct. > > > >>If this is true, wouldn't it have made sense to put some checking in the >>utilities to detect the level of support in the kernel and either put out a >>meaningful error message or simply ignore the option? As it stands now, >>from the command line mkfs doesn't even indicate that there was an error. >> >> > >There were no error at mkfs time. May be user is doing mkfs from some bootable >floppy with old kernel and then plans to boot into more modern kernel, for >example. > > > >>Even if the ReiserFS utilities don't check, is there some way I can query >>the ReiserFS kernel code to detect the presence of these features? >> >> > >Well, the simplest way is to have (or make) small file with reiserfs image >with non-standard journal and try to mount it ;) >Or you can try to mount valid reiserfs fs with jdev= mount option, which >is only present on code with nonstandard journaling support. >In short, there is no easy way. But if you can think of any, >we might implement it if it non-intrusive and easy enough. >Actually this is not very reliable in the sence that you cannot say >which kernel user plans to use later on. > >Bye, > Oleg > > > > I don't agree with Oleg's answer. Lack of a meaningful error message is a bug. Hans