From: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
To: kreijack@inwind.it
Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org,
Austin S Hemmelgarn <ahferroin7@gmail.com>,
Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/7] btrfs-progs: Doc/mkfs: Add extra condition for rootdir option
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 20:07:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170912180753.GI29043@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0a949fd9-f0cf-22c5-4e91-ebb1bfad1355@libero.it>
On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 07:50:19PM +0200, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
> On 09/12/2017 07:03 PM, David Sterba wrote:
> > Say I want to prepare a minimal image but will provide a large file
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> I think that if the target is a file AND --minimize is passed, it is a
> reasonable expectation that the file is created "on the fly" and grown
> up to what needed.
>
> What I mean is that "--minimize" is passed (and a file is passed), mkfs.btrfs should
> a) create the file if it doesn't exist, and avoid any check about its length
> b) truncate the file at the end
I think the farthest-offset write will extend the file size, so we
should not truncate it, in the sense 'make it smaller than it is', but
rather 'align it to the size where the filesystem expects live data".
Eg. if we write a blockgroup header to the beginning of 256MB, but fill
only a few kilobytes, effectively writing to some range, say, [0..32MB].
Then reads past the 32MB (eg. through loop device) would fail.
As long as the file is zero, minimizing will be implicit. My example
with the provided large file was wrong in retrospect. I'll think about
that more.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-09-12 18:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-09-11 6:36 [PATCH v2 0/7] Mkfs: Rework --rootdir to a more generic behavior Qu Wenruo
2017-09-11 6:36 ` [PATCH v2 1/7] btrfs-progs: Refactor find_next_chunk() to get rid of parameter root and objectid Qu Wenruo
2017-09-11 6:36 ` [PATCH v2 2/7] btrfs-progs: Fix one-byte overlap bug in free_block_group_cache Qu Wenruo
2017-09-11 6:36 ` [PATCH v2 3/7] btrfs-progs: mkfs: Rework rootdir option to avoid custom chunk layout Qu Wenruo
2017-09-11 6:36 ` [PATCH v2 4/7] btrfs-progs: mkfs: Update allocation info before verbose output Qu Wenruo
2017-09-11 6:36 ` [PATCH v2 5/7] btrfs-progs: Avoid BUG_ON for chunk allocation when ENOSPC happens Qu Wenruo
2017-09-11 6:36 ` [PATCH v2 6/7] btrfs-progs: mkfs: Workaround BUG_ON caused by rootdir option Qu Wenruo
2017-09-11 6:36 ` [PATCH v2 7/7] btrfs-progs: Doc/mkfs: Add extra condition for " Qu Wenruo
2017-09-12 17:03 ` David Sterba
2017-09-12 17:50 ` Goffredo Baroncelli
2017-09-12 18:07 ` David Sterba [this message]
2017-09-13 0:32 ` Qu Wenruo
2017-09-15 12:56 ` David Sterba
2017-09-15 13:24 ` Qu Wenruo
2017-09-15 15:48 ` David Sterba
2017-09-16 1:15 ` Qu Wenruo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170912180753.GI29043@suse.cz \
--to=dsterba@suse.cz \
--cc=ahferroin7@gmail.com \
--cc=kreijack@inwind.it \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).