* journal_dev + metadata_csum issues
@ 2014-09-04 4:14 TR Reardon
2014-09-06 7:13 ` Darrick J. Wong
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: TR Reardon @ 2014-09-04 4:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-ext4, darrick.wong
1) tune2fs hiccups when presented with journal device fs. Should it instead at least report "this is a journal device" rather than "invalid super block"?
2) no way to create journal_dev with metadata_csum. This would provide checksum for the fs superblock.
3) dumpe2fs should still display journal flags for journal_dev; currently it fails to display journal flags.
4) s_jnl_blocks in the superblock should be zeroed when removing a journal (ie ^has_journal) or when setting the journal to journal_dev. Currently, the legacy (now dead) block list is maintained. I'd argue that will invite misuse.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: journal_dev + metadata_csum issues
2014-09-04 4:14 journal_dev + metadata_csum issues TR Reardon
@ 2014-09-06 7:13 ` Darrick J. Wong
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Darrick J. Wong @ 2014-09-06 7:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: TR Reardon; +Cc: linux-ext4
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 12:14:32AM -0400, TR Reardon wrote:
> 1) tune2fs hiccups when presented with journal device fs. Should it instead
> at least report "this is a journal device" rather than "invalid super block"?
Yes. e2fsck/debugfs seem to issue the 'unsupported features' complaint but
without the 'invalid superblock' wording.
> 2) no way to create journal_dev with metadata_csum. This would provide
> checksum for the fs superblock.
Not sure how useful this is since most of the SB is irrelevant here. But I
don't see any reason why we shouldn't let users turn it on.
> 3) dumpe2fs should still display journal flags for journal_dev; currently it
> fails to display journal flags.
Ick. Yes, that should work.
> 4) s_jnl_blocks in the superblock should be zeroed when removing a journal
> (ie ^has_journal) or when setting the journal to journal_dev. Currently, the
> legacy (now dead) block list is maintained. I'd argue that will invite
> misuse.
Seems like a reasonable precaution.
Now, does anyone know why ext4 reports a df size of 64ZB when I create an
external journal FS? :)
--D
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-09-06 7:13 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-09-04 4:14 journal_dev + metadata_csum issues TR Reardon
2014-09-06 7:13 ` Darrick J. Wong
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.