From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 969ABC433E2 for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 20:42:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 452B3205CB for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 20:42:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="pbbci4TT" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726820AbgIPUm4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Sep 2020 16:42:56 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56674 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726766AbgIPREy (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Sep 2020 13:04:54 -0400 Received: from mail-il1-x142.google.com (mail-il1-x142.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::142]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BB22CC02C288 for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 09:19:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-il1-x142.google.com with SMTP id t13so7015523ile.9 for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 09:19:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=aQMH6HcMOeYMIDsmRdWsNMfGs4etElPTyEoOfaNrlVo=; b=pbbci4TT+CY9sSLiKluvCxM7WFu1lKPpKwHEJIibHS/xK2byO68EhZRT1x5CNDNt/3 3WQl/nj2wyNkfh9dBa30Nh/o2W5iyN9GzqMYe2eJspNIQwpAFcTfHsM0a6x9gqzTYrzV BN9wVckGe1APq+rfOR/1y+yLoIMPW+DI66Ws3mFORl0kN8o1oh/a0Zb6bInar+M5+6rr 7YpZl4ywhULUqiUbhH8MxyWjMj82cn2RviHcTJO9NDI79rgm0NQUtu7CHHZd3XeKXeGG Vmd+envTo6zJ5bhefvB4NCMvbmQQaeJVLKSiLchHzv57u7CwUvuqiNROFZFimV/aJRzW KKVQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=aQMH6HcMOeYMIDsmRdWsNMfGs4etElPTyEoOfaNrlVo=; b=YVFNsauwDLmj6/v25kYOnM+TCOkMnBmNJiUGgbtj81v2ytRqfaNCS7fwp9eSEOMIcJ sjOaoFLvpFgKcbTs9YyhrZRQ2DK5UO0Sd4Uls9646Q10zL/ZtYSyjzAZU6e2lE2c3IkX FPjHAqE395jTDuBDFMWhqsG6LS8eHjbkYna6JEBFSc6OumqA+fTWno5aTw4fojr885H3 DQ1+NyEC2NhScQU5UIXD/p2BE2hImeRJO5i3mfJ8plj8zqeoAvSCGk5gsOCcYrB3SoMH SXKSVKyXZ+mDbB4b0aXOY4PzUzagKjsDe7BfhU+vdh+cb/OV6FWRtzRZ99W7dMnB8NNr /4bg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531bYAnOHvAZ5tSmjbu2DpHGeAo9G7tEpOqKvHMvjz7Js8qntR7x XEHBMZtdzOF2ILwTpPUhTR/9bRFts5dIacHzIvE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz/pu/lDahVimms/ty38atM+cdRiQjvmZ88zWwC8jsvDTqCmNFgrpd0UESX2OTS3u1KpbjBVW0qTEQbzEkbS8w= X-Received: by 2002:a92:2e0b:: with SMTP id v11mr22405427ile.112.1600273166755; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 09:19:26 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200915053532.63279-1-wqu@suse.com> In-Reply-To: <20200915053532.63279-1-wqu@suse.com> From: Neal Gompa Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 12:18:50 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/19] btrfs: add read-only support for subpage sector size To: Qu Wenruo Cc: Btrfs BTRFS , Josef Bacik , Chris Murphy Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 1:36 AM Qu Wenruo wrote: > > Patches can be fetched from github: > https://github.com/adam900710/linux/tree/subpage > > Currently btrfs only allows to mount fs with sectorsize =3D=3D PAGE_SIZE. > > That means, for 64K page size system, they can only use 64K sector size > fs. > This brings a big compatible problem for btrfs. > > This patch is going to slightly solve the problem by, allowing 64K > system to mount 4K sectorsize fs in read-only mode. > > The main objective here, is to remove the blockage in the code base, and > pave the road to full RW mount support. > Is there a reason we don't include a patch in here to just hardwire the block size to 4K going forward? --=20 =E7=9C=9F=E5=AE=9F=E3=81=AF=E3=81=84=E3=81=A4=E3=82=82=E4=B8=80=E3=81=A4=EF= =BC=81/ Always, there's only one truth!