On Thursday 11 Feb 2016 23:17:38 Chandan Rajendra wrote: > Btrfs assumes block size to be the same as the machine's page > size. This would mean that a Btrfs instance created on a 4k page size > machine (e.g. x86) will not be mountable on machines with larger page > sizes (e.g. PPC64/AARCH64). This patchset aims to resolve this > incompatibility. > > This patchset continues with the work posted previously at > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.btrfs/52815. > > I have reverted the upstream commit "btrfs: fix lockups from > btrfs_clear_path_blocking" (f82c458a2c3ffb94b431fc6ad791a79df1b3713e) > since this led to soft-lockups when the patch "Btrfs: > subpagesize-blocksize: Prevent writes to an extent buffer when > PG_writeback flag is set" is applied. During 2015's Vault Conference > Btrfs meetup, Chris Mason had suggested that he will write up a > suitable locking function to be used when writing dirty pages that map > metadata blocks. Until we have a suitable locking function available, > this patchset temporarily disables the commit > f82c458a2c3ffb94b431fc6ad791a79df1b3713e. > > The commits for the Btrfs kernel module can be found at > https://github.com/chandanr/linux/tree/btrfs/subpagesize-blocksize. > > To create a filesystem with block size < page size, a patched version > of the Btrfs-progs package is required. The corresponding fixes for > Btrfs-progs can be found at > https://github.com/chandanr/btrfs-progs/tree/btrfs/subpagesize-blocksize. > > Fstests run status: > 1. x86_64 > - With 4k sectorsize, all the tests that succeed with > linux-btrfs/integration-4.5 branch also do so with the patches > applied. > - With 2k sectorsize, all the *generic* tests that succeed with > linux-btrfs/integration-4.5 branch also do so with the patches > applied. > 2. ppc64 > - With 4k sectorsize, 16k nodesize and with "nospace_cache" mount > option, all the *generic* tests that succeed with > linux-btrfs/integration-4.5 branch also do so with the patches > applied. > - With 64k sectorsize & nodesize, all the tests that succeed with > linux-btrfs/integration-4.5 branch also do so with the patches > applied. >
Hi Chris/Josef, Can you please look into the patchset and provide review comments if any. I am hoping to get the patchset merged by linux-4.6. -- chandan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
