From: Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Btrfs updates for 2.6.31-rc
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 19:19:03 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090612231903.GE24336@mit.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.01.0906121450530.3237@localhost.localdomain>
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 02:55:33PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2009, Chris Mason wrote:
> >
> > Existing filesystems will be upgraded to the new format on the first
> > mount. All of your old data will still be there and still work
> > properly, but I strongly recommend a full backup before going to the new
> > code.
>
> Auugh.
>
> This is horrible. I just screwed up my system by booting a kernel on this:
> it worked beatifully, but due to other reasons I then wanted to bisect a
> totally unrelated issue. While having _totally_ forgotten about this
> issue, even if I was technically aware of it.
>
> .. so I installed a new kernel, and now it won't boot due to "couldn't
> mount because of unsupported optional features (1)". In fact, I have no
> kernel available on that system that will boot, since my normal "safe"
> fall-back kernels are all distro kernels that can't boot this either.
We learned this lesson the hard way with ext3, a long time ago,
although occasionally we've had to relearn it along the way. The
normal failure mode is that some user is still using some ancient
distribution, (say, Red Hat 8), and for some reason they boot using a
Fedora Rescue CD, and are really annoyed when the filesystem is no
longer mountable using the 2.4 kernel that comes with their ancient
distribution.
So my policy at least with ext4 is to *never* add any new patches were
the kernel automatically adds some new feature to the compatibility
bitmasks. The user should have to explicitly and manually use a
userspace program (i.e., tune2fs) to add some new feature. At least
initially we had some cases where ext4 would automatically add some
new feature flag thanks to a mount option, but I believe we've gotten
rid of all of those cases.
I'd suggest that btrfs follow the same strategy; yeah, it means you
have to keep more backwards compatibility code for longer, but as
btrfs matures, it'll definitely be a Good Thing.
- Ted
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-12 23:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-11 20:44 [GIT PULL] Btrfs updates for 2.6.31-rc Chris Mason
2009-06-12 21:55 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-06-12 23:19 ` Theodore Tso [this message]
2009-06-13 0:18 ` Chris Mason
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-07-02 19:10 Chris Mason
2009-07-02 19:46 ` Chris Mason
2009-07-30 17:56 Chris Mason
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=20090612231903.GE24336@mit.edu \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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