From: Andreas Dilger <adilger@dilger.ca>
To: "Patrick J. LoPresti" <lopresti@gmail.com>
Cc: ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] OCFS2: Allow huge (> 16 TiB) volumes to mount
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 22:46:50 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <DA64905D-C83B-4CF5-9405-65F7F82F9563@dilger.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikAEycm5PKTLPuRFcB0e4qNp5EuQbKUx5aruNrh@mail.gmail.com>
On 2010-07-12, at 19:08, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 5:21 PM, Andreas Dilger <adilger@dilger.ca> wrote:
>> On 2010-07-11, at 11:04, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote:
>>>
>>> + /* Absolute addressability check (borrowed from ext4/super.c) */
>>> + if ((max_block >
>>> + (sector_t)(~0LL) >> (osb->sb->s_blocksize_bits - 9)) ||
>>> + (max_block > (pgoff_t)(~0LL) >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT -
>>> + osb->sb->s_blocksize_bits))) {
>>> + mlog(ML_ERROR, "Volume too large "
>>> + "to mount safely on this system");
>>> + status = -EFBIG;
>>> + goto out;
>>> + }
>>
>> This hunk of code is actually in several filesystems. It wouldn't be a bad idea to make it a library function that can be called by the filesystem to check the kernel page cache and block layer can handle these large filesystems.
>
> True, but some of them do it differently (e.g. see the #if switch in
> xfs_sb_validate_fsb_count). Tracking down all variants and changing
> them is a much larger task than my simple patch.
>
> Are you suggesting I need to do this before my patch is accepted at
> all? Or is this a refactoring that can happen later?
I'm just suggesting it should be done at some point. I thought it would be better to do it first, rather than add yet another copy of this code. That said, I hate to block useful fixes because of cleanup (and I have no control over OCFS2 anyway :-). However, I've found that once the fix is in people usually forget (or become too busy) to do the cleanup and it just lingers on unseen.
Cheers, Andreas
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-07-13 4:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-11 17:03 [PATCH 1/2] JBD2: Allow feature checks before journal recovery Patrick J. LoPresti
2010-07-11 17:04 ` [PATCH 2/2] OCFS2: Allow huge (> 16 TiB) volumes to mount Patrick J. LoPresti
2010-07-13 0:21 ` Andreas Dilger
2010-07-13 1:08 ` Patrick J. LoPresti
2010-07-13 1:25 ` Dave Chinner
2010-07-13 1:37 ` Patrick J. LoPresti
2010-07-13 4:46 ` Andreas Dilger [this message]
2010-07-13 5:00 ` Patrick J. LoPresti
2010-07-13 8:10 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Joel Becker
2010-07-21 17:27 ` [PATCH 1/2] JBD2: Allow feature checks before journal recovery Jan Kara
2010-07-21 17:42 ` Patrick J. LoPresti
2010-07-21 17:50 ` Jan Kara
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=DA64905D-C83B-4CF5-9405-65F7F82F9563@dilger.ca \
--to=adilger@dilger.ca \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lopresti@gmail.com \
--cc=ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.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