On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 08:18:04PM +0200, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
To be clear, I would like to avoid inode_cache on 64bit machine.
In order to avoid the risk to exhaust the inode on 32bit and to be
backward compatible with what already exists, we could add a flag to
mkfs.btrfs to be only
On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 08:12:54PM +0200, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
Adding the printk is probably a good thing, but I'd rather reconsider
using inode_cache at all. IMO it's supposed to fix problems with inode
numbers that we don't have.
IIRC, the problem is for the 32 bit system, were
Hi David,
On 05/12/2014 04:39 PM, David Sterba wrote:
Because most modern hardware is 64 bit (with the exception of ARM ?),
could be make sense to allow btrfs to work without inode_cache only on
64bit, loosing the possibility to be used on 32 bit system.
Instead when the inode_cache is
Goffredo Baroncelli posted on Mon, 12 May 2014 20:18:04 +0200 as
excerpted:
Finally I have a question: it is possible to disable inode_cache ? what
means the flag noinode_cache ? It means disable the inode cache at
all, or only avoid to store on disk the inode cache ?
Unlike space_cache,
On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 04:22:13PM +0200, Tomáš Pružina wrote:
I ran into some troubles with inode-cache rebuilding on root fs after
filesystem was mounted without inode_cache, which stalls boot of my
box by several minutes.
I boot from commandline like:
root=/dev/sda4 rootfstype=btrfs
On 05/09/2014 04:51 PM, David Sterba wrote:
On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 04:22:13PM +0200, Tomáš Pružina wrote:
I ran into some troubles with inode-cache rebuilding on root fs after
filesystem was mounted without inode_cache, which stalls boot of my
box by several minutes.
I boot from commandline
