public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
Cc: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: Fix LSF default inconsistency
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 12:08:39 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081211110839.GH23742@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081211115844.1b1dbf49@hyperion.delvare>

On Thu, Dec 11 2008, Jean Delvare wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 11:41:10 +0100, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 11 2008, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > > Configuration option LSF has a default which contradicts its help
> > > text. The help text says "if unsure, say Y" but there is no explicit
> > > default, and the default default is N.
> > > 
> > > This inconsistency was introduced by commit
> > > 88b9adb073b7a69a54b1b14423103bc24587ebdc. According to the commit
> > > message, we want users to enable this option, so it should default to
> > > Y.
> > 
> > I wonder if we just shouldn't get rid of this option and just have the
> > single CONFIG_LBD option control both of these. If you set CONFIG_LBD,
> > you probably want large files as well. And CONFIG_LSF without CONFIG_LBD
> > doesn't make a lot of sense.
> > 
> > Would anyone object to such a change?
> 
> No objection from me, getting rid of configuration options almost
> always gets my vote :)

Yeah, mine too. One recent addition was CONFIG_UNEVICTABLE_LRU - why on
earth is that an option?!

Anyway, how about something like this? Totally untested...

diff --git a/block/Kconfig b/block/Kconfig
index 1ab7c15..ce566dd 100644
--- a/block/Kconfig
+++ b/block/Kconfig
@@ -24,21 +24,18 @@ menuconfig BLOCK
 if BLOCK
 
 config LBD
-	bool "Support for Large Block Devices"
+	bool "Support for Large Block Devices and files"
 	depends on !64BIT
+	select LSF
 	help
-	  Enable block devices of size 2TB and larger.
+	  Enable block devices or files of size 2TB and larger.
 
 	  This option is required to support the full capacity of large
 	  (2TB+) block devices, including RAID, disk, Network Block Device,
 	  Logical Volume Manager (LVM) and loopback.
-
-	  For example, RAID devices are frequently bigger than the capacity
-	  of the largest individual hard drive.
-
-	  This option is not required if you have individual disk drives
-	  which total 2TB+ and you are not aggregating the capacity into
-	  a large block device (e.g. using RAID or LVM).
+	
+	  This option also enables support for single files larger than
+	  2TB.
 
 	  If unsure, say N.
 
@@ -57,15 +54,6 @@ config BLK_DEV_IO_TRACE
 
 	  If unsure, say N.
 
-config LSF
-	bool "Support for Large Single Files"
-	depends on !64BIT
-	help
-	  Say Y here if you want to be able to handle very large files (2TB
-	  and larger), otherwise say N.
-
-	  If unsure, say Y.
-
 config BLK_DEV_BSG
 	bool "Block layer SG support v4 (EXPERIMENTAL)"
 	depends on EXPERIMENTAL

-- 
Jens Axboe


  reply	other threads:[~2008-12-11 11:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-12-11 10:16 [PATCH] block: Fix LSF default inconsistency Jean Delvare
2008-12-11 10:41 ` Jens Axboe
2008-12-11 10:58   ` Jean Delvare
2008-12-11 11:08     ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2008-12-11 11:33       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-12-11 11:36         ` Jens Axboe
2008-12-11 11:44           ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-12-12  7:58             ` Jens Axboe
2008-12-12 13:50               ` Rik van Riel
2008-12-12 15:11                 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-12-12 16:01                   ` Hugh Dickins
2008-12-12 16:35                     ` Rik van Riel
2008-12-12 17:37                       ` Hugh Dickins
2008-12-12 18:00                         ` Rik van Riel
2008-12-12 19:26                           ` Hugh Dickins
2008-12-11 12:44       ` Jean Delvare
2008-12-11 12:50         ` Jens Axboe
2008-12-12  7:48           ` Jean Delvare
2008-12-12  7:54             ` Jens Axboe
2008-12-12  9:41               ` Jean Delvare
2008-12-12 18:18                 ` Jens Axboe

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=20081211110839.GH23742@kernel.dk \
    --to=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
    --cc=Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com \
    --cc=khali@linux-fr.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@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