lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Jan]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [PATCH v5 00/22] Rewrite XIP code and add XIP support to ext4
Date
Are you hitting the same problems with ext4 fsck that we did?  Version 1.42.8 reports spurious corruption.  From the 1.42.9 changelog:

* Fixed a regression introduced in 1.42.8 which would cause e2fsck to
erroneously report uninitialized extents past i_size to be invalid.

________________________________________
From: Dave Chinner [david@fromorbit.com]
Sent: January 23, 2014 1:01 AM
To: Wilcox, Matthew R
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org; linux-mm@kvack.org; linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/22] Rewrite XIP code and add XIP support to ext4

On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 08:24:18PM -0500, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> This series of patches add support for XIP to ext4. Unfortunately,
> it turns out to be necessary to rewrite the existing XIP support code
> first due to races that are unfixable in the current design.
>
> Since v4 of this patchset, I've improved the documentation, fixed a
> couple of warnings that a newer version of gcc emitted, and fixed a
> bug where we would read/write the wrong address for I/Os that were not
> aligned to PAGE_SIZE.
>
> I've dropped the PMD fault patch from this set since there are some
> places where we would need to split a PMD page and there's no way to do
> that right now. In its place, I've added a patch which attempts to add
> support for unwritten extents. I'm still in two minds about this; on the
> one hand, it's clearly a win for reads and writes. On the other hand,
> it adds a lot of complexity, and it probably isn't a win for pagefaults.

I ran this through xfstests, but ext4 in default configuration fails
too many of the tests with filesystem corruption and other cascading
failures on the quick group tests (generic/013, generic/070,
generic/075, generic/091, etc) for me to be able to tell if adding
MOUNT_OPTIONS="-o xip" adds any problems or not....

XIP definitely caused generic/001 to fail, but other than that I
can't really tell. Still, it looks like it functions enough to be
able to add XFS support on top of. I'll get back to you with that ;)

Cheers,

Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-01-23 14:01    [W:0.277 / U:1.032 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site