From: "Jose R. Santos" <jrs@us.ibm.com>
To: Andreas Dilger <adilger@clusterfs.com>
Cc: linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] BIG_BG vs extended META_BG in ext4
Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 23:39:08 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070630233908.115ec78e@gara> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070630055125.GC5535@schatzie.adilger.int>
On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 01:51:25 -0400
Andreas Dilger <adilger@clusterfs.com> wrote:
> I don't think there is actually any fundamental difference between these
> proposals. The reality is that we cannot change the semantics of the
> META_BG flag at this point, since both e2fsprogs and ext3/ext4 in the
> kernel understand META_BG to mean only "group descriptor backups are
> in groups {0, 1, last} of the metagroup" and nothing else.
Agree. I call it extended META_BG for lack of a better name, but a new
feature flag will be required.
> If we want to allow the bitmaps and inode table outside the group they
> represent then this needs to be a separate feature flag, and we may as
> well include the additional improvement of the BIG_BG feature at the
> same time. I don't think this really any reason to claim there is "no
> need to have a concept of block groups".
Well when I think about block groups, it seems to me that its basically
a range of blocks with some blocks dedicated for holding important meta
data. If you remove the meta data, then all that is left is a range of
blocks with some backup data scatter around specific locations on the
disk. Of course, my definition of what a block group is could just be
wrong. :)
We could blur the difference between these two features though.
> Also note that e2fsprogs already reserves the bg_free_*_bg fields for
> BIG_BG in the expanded group descriptors, though there is no official
> definition for BIG_BG:
>
> struct ext4_group_desc
> {
> [ ext3_group_desc ]
> __u32 bg_block_bitmap_hi; /* Blocks bitmap block MSB */
> __u32 bg_inode_bitmap_hi; /* Inodes bitmap block MSB */
> __u32 bg_inode_table_hi; /* Inodes table block MSB */
> __u16 bg_free_blocks_count_hi;/* Free blocks count MSB */
> __u16 bg_free_inodes_count_hi;/* Free inodes count MSB */
> __u16 bg_used_dirs_count_hi; /* Directories count MSB */
> __u16 bg_pad;
> __u32 bg_reserved2[3];
> };
>
>
>
> Cheers, Andreas
> --
> Andreas Dilger
> Principal Software Engineer
> Cluster File Systems, Inc.
>
Thanks for the pointer.
-JRS
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-07-01 4:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-06-29 22:09 [RFC] BIG_BG vs extended META_BG in ext4 Jose R. Santos
2007-06-30 5:51 ` Andreas Dilger
2007-06-30 14:24 ` Mingming Cao
2007-07-01 4:39 ` Jose R. Santos [this message]
2007-07-01 12:30 ` Theodore Tso
2007-07-01 14:48 ` Jose R. Santos
2007-07-02 15:49 ` Theodore Tso
2007-07-02 14:12 ` Mingming Cao
2007-07-05 6:56 ` Valerie Henson
[not found] ` <D5D3223C-4EB0-413B-A81A-05F6DDC0FEEB@bull.net>
2007-07-01 4:40 ` Jose R. Santos
2007-07-01 16:31 ` Andreas Dilger
2007-07-02 14:39 ` Jose R. Santos
2007-07-03 17:55 ` Andreas Dilger
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=20070630233908.115ec78e@gara \
--to=jrs@us.ibm.com \
--cc=adilger@clusterfs.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
/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).