From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mondschein.lichtvoll.de ([194.150.191.11]:47401 "EHLO mail.lichtvoll.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753280AbdKNHej (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Nov 2017 02:34:39 -0500 From: Martin Steigerwald To: dsterba@suse.cz, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Read before you deploy btrfs + zstd Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2017 08:34:37 +0100 Message-ID: <3013353.6rxLtS64S0@merkaba> In-Reply-To: <20171113225046.GD28899@suse.cz> References: <20171113225046.GD28899@suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hello David. David Sterba - 13.11.17, 23:50: > while 4.14 is still fresh, let me address some concerns I've seen on linux > forums already. > > The newly added ZSTD support is a feature that has broader impact than > just the runtime compression. The btrfs-progs understand filesystem with > ZSTD since 4.13. The remaining key part is the bootloader. > > Up to now, there are no bootloaders supporting ZSTD. This could lead to an > unmountable filesystem if the critical files under /boot get accidentally > or intentionally compressed by ZSTD. But otherwise ZSTD is safe to use? Are you aware of any other issues? I consider switching from LZO to ZSTD on this ThinkPad T520 with Sandybridge. Thank you, -- Martin