On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 03:27:02AM -0500, Zygo Blaxell wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 03:58:06PM -0500, Chris Mason wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 11/16/2016 11:10 AM, David Sterba wrote:
> > >On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 09:55:34AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> > >>At 11/12/2016 04:22 AM, Liu Bo wrote:
> > >>>O
hello,
On 11/19/2016 04:58 AM, Chris Mason wrote:
On 11/16/2016 11:10 AM, David Sterba wrote:
On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 09:55:34AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
At 11/12/2016 04:22 AM, Liu Bo wrote:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 02:47:42PM +0800, Wang Xiaoguang wrote:
If we use mount option "-o max_inli
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 03:58:06PM -0500, Chris Mason wrote:
>
>
> On 11/16/2016 11:10 AM, David Sterba wrote:
> >On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 09:55:34AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> >>At 11/12/2016 04:22 AM, Liu Bo wrote:
> >>>On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 02:47:42PM +0800, Wang Xiaoguang wrote:
> If we u
On 11/16/2016 11:10 AM, David Sterba wrote:
On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 09:55:34AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
At 11/12/2016 04:22 AM, Liu Bo wrote:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 02:47:42PM +0800, Wang Xiaoguang wrote:
If we use mount option "-o max_inline=sectorsize", say 4096, indeed
even for a fresh fs
On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 09:55:34AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> At 11/12/2016 04:22 AM, Liu Bo wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 02:47:42PM +0800, Wang Xiaoguang wrote:
> >> If we use mount option "-o max_inline=sectorsize", say 4096, indeed
> >> even for a fresh fs, say nodesize is 16k, we can not m
At 11/12/2016 04:22 AM, Liu Bo wrote:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 02:47:42PM +0800, Wang Xiaoguang wrote:
If we use mount option "-o max_inline=sectorsize", say 4096, indeed
even for a fresh fs, say nodesize is 16k, we can not make the first
4k data completely inline, I found this conditon causing
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 02:47:42PM +0800, Wang Xiaoguang wrote:
> If we use mount option "-o max_inline=sectorsize", say 4096, indeed
> even for a fresh fs, say nodesize is 16k, we can not make the first
> 4k data completely inline, I found this conditon causing this issue:
> !compressed_size &&
hi,
On 10/11/2016 02:47 PM, Wang Xiaoguang wrote:
If we use mount option "-o max_inline=sectorsize", say 4096, indeed
even for a fresh fs, say nodesize is 16k, we can not make the first
4k data completely inline, I found this conditon causing this issue:
!compressed_size && (actual_end & (roo
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:35:46AM +0800, Wang Xiaoguang wrote:
> hi,
>
> On 10/11/2016 11:49 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> >On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 12:47 AM, Wang Xiaoguang
> > wrote:
> >>If we use mount option "-o max_inline=sectorsize", say 4096, indeed
> >>even for a fresh fs, say nodesize is 16k,
hi,
On 10/11/2016 11:49 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 12:47 AM, Wang Xiaoguang
wrote:
If we use mount option "-o max_inline=sectorsize", say 4096, indeed
even for a fresh fs, say nodesize is 16k, we can not make the first
4k data completely inline, I found this conditon causi
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 12:47 AM, Wang Xiaoguang
wrote:
> If we use mount option "-o max_inline=sectorsize", say 4096, indeed
> even for a fresh fs, say nodesize is 16k, we can not make the first
> 4k data completely inline, I found this conditon causing this issue:
> !compressed_size && (actual
If we use mount option "-o max_inline=sectorsize", say 4096, indeed
even for a fresh fs, say nodesize is 16k, we can not make the first
4k data completely inline, I found this conditon causing this issue:
!compressed_size && (actual_end & (root->sectorsize - 1)) == 0
If it retuns true, we'll not
12 matches
Mail list logo