On May 22, 2007  15:45 -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 05:03:11PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > A quick patch to sanity check the inode ratio vs the inode size.  In some
> > cases Lustre users have tried specifying an inode size of 4096 bytes, while
> > keeping an inode ratio of one inode per 4096 bytes, causing mke2fs to spin
> > forever trying to allocate the inode tables.  I'm sure more people will do
> > this now that large inodes are available in ext4 and documented in 
> > e2fsprogs.
> 
> I can't replicate this.  I'm guessing you are doing this with the
> clusterfs codebase that has the extent patches?  Mke2fs shouldn't be
> spinning if it can't allocate the inode tables.  Instead it should
> print the error message:

Hmm, I suppose it might be due to running this on a 2TB filesystem that is
trying to allocate a huge number of inodes.  It could also have been with
an older version of mke2fs - it was a customer that reported the problem.

I just happened to be poking in that bit of code recently and thought I'd
add the sanity check.  I don't think it relates to CFS patches, since we
don't change mke2fs at all for the extent code.

We can let it drop for now, until I have a reproducer.

Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Principal Software Engineer
Cluster File Systems, Inc.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to