mirror of
https://github.com/kdave/btrfs-progs
synced 2024-12-26 08:02:21 +00:00
btrfs-progs: docs: add more explanation on subapge limits
The current subpage support in v5.18 has several limits, the most obvious ones are: - Only support 64KiB page size - No RAID56 support The supports are already queued for v5.19. And some minor ones: - No inline extent write support Read is always supported. Subpage mount will always just act as "max_inline=0". - Compression write is only for page aligned range. Read is always supported, no matter the alignment. - Extra memory usage for scrub Patchset is hanging there for a while though. Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
This commit is contained in:
parent
99a7f7988f
commit
e729d41ce6
@ -6,6 +6,58 @@ using a filesystem that has different size of data block size (*sectorsize*)
|
||||
and the host CPU page size. For easier implementation the support was limited
|
||||
to the exactly same size of the block and page. On x86_64 this is typically
|
||||
4KiB, but there are other architectures commonly used that make use of larger
|
||||
pages, like 64KiB on 64bit ARM or PowerPC. A filesystem created on one cannot
|
||||
be mounted on the other. The subpage support is still work in progress in 5.18
|
||||
but the support is incrementally added with each release.
|
||||
pages, like 64KiB on 64bit ARM or PowerPC. This means filesystems created
|
||||
with 64KiB sector size cannot be mounted on a system with 4KiB page size.
|
||||
|
||||
While with subpage support, systems with 64KiB page size can create (still needs
|
||||
"-s 4k" option for mkfs.btrfs) and mount filesystems with 4KiB sectorsize,
|
||||
allowing us to push 4KiB sectorsize as default sectorsize for all platforms in the
|
||||
near future.
|
||||
|
||||
Requirements, limitations
|
||||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||||
|
||||
The initial subpage support has been added in v5.15, although it's still
|
||||
considered as experimental at the time of writing (v5.18), most features are
|
||||
already working without problems.
|
||||
|
||||
End users can mount filesystems with 4KiB sectorsize and do their usual
|
||||
workload, while should not notice any obvious change, as long as the initial
|
||||
mount succeeded (there are cases a mount will be rejected though).
|
||||
|
||||
The following features has some limitations for subpage:
|
||||
|
||||
- RAID56 support
|
||||
This support is already queued for v5.19 cycle.
|
||||
Any fs with RAID56 chunks will be rejected at mount time for now.
|
||||
|
||||
- Support for page size other than 64KiB
|
||||
The support for other page sizes (16KiB, 32KiB and more) are already queued
|
||||
for v5.19 cycle.
|
||||
Initially the subpage support is only for 64KiB support, but the design makes
|
||||
it pretty easy to enable support for other page sizes.
|
||||
|
||||
- No inline extent creation
|
||||
This is an artificial limit, to prevent mixed inline and regular extents.
|
||||
|
||||
It's possible to create mixed inline and regular extents even with
|
||||
non-subpage mount for certain corner cases, it's way easier to create such
|
||||
mixed extents for subpage.
|
||||
|
||||
Thus max_inline mount option will be sliently ignored for subpage mounts,
|
||||
and it always acts as "max_inline=0".
|
||||
|
||||
- Compression write is limited to page aligned ranges
|
||||
Compression write for subpage is introduced in v5.16, with the limitation
|
||||
that only page aligned range can be compressed.
|
||||
This limitation is due to how btrfs handles delayed allocation.
|
||||
|
||||
- No support for v1 space cache
|
||||
V1 space cache is considered deprecated, and we're defaulting to v2 cache
|
||||
in btrfs-progs already.
|
||||
The old v1 cache has quite some hard coded page size usage, and consider it
|
||||
is already deprecated, we force v2 cache for subpage.
|
||||
|
||||
- Slightly higher memory usage for scrub
|
||||
This is due to how we allocate pages for scrub, and will be fixed in the coming
|
||||
releases soon.
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user