Re: [PATCH 0/2] Add inode checksum support to ext4

[Joel Becker]

On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 07:52:41AM +0800, Coly Li wrote:
> On 2011å07æ31æ 15:08, Joel Becker Wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 03:25:32PM +0800, Coly Li wrote:
> >> And in non-journal mode, there is not copy of any meta data block in jbd2, we need to be
> >> more careful in check summing, e.g. inode/block bitmap blocks...
> > 
> > 	Sure, but you could use a trigger in journaled mode and then do
> > the checksums directly in the __ext4_handle_journal_dirty_*() functions
> > in non-journaled mode.  Sure, it would be a little more CPU time, but
> > the user picked "checksums + no journal" at mkfs time.
> > 
> 
> Yes, my idea was similar to you.
> One thing not clear to me is, in non-journal mode, how to make the page of bitmap block being stable. Because bits
> setting in Ext4 bitmap is non-locking, it might be possible that new bit setting after check sum is calculated.

	Every place that changes the bits will eventually call
ext4_journal_dirty(), which recalculates the checksum.  So there's no
danger of a set-bit-after-last-checksum.  But you will have to lock
around the checksum calculation in non-journaling mode.  JBD2 handles it
for journaling mode.

Joel

-- 

"The whole principle is wrong; it's like demanding that grown men 
 live on skim milk because the baby can't eat steak."
        - author Robert A. Heinlein on censorship

			http://www.jlbec.org/
			jlbec@xxxxxxxxxxxx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/