Re: Journaling patches

[Simon Burge <simonb%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

Christos Zoulas wrote:

> On May 7,  2:33am, simonb%NetBSD.org@localhost (Simon Burge) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: Journaling patches
> 
> Yes that would do it. I would probably allocate some of the flag bits
> as the version, something like:
> 
> uint8_t fs_journal_version;
> uint8_t fs_journal_reserved[3];
> uint32_t fs_journal_flags;
> uint64_t fs_journal_location;
> uint64_t fs_journal_size;
> 
> but what you have is fine too.

I'm wary of hardcoding the names "fs_journal_location" and
"fs_journal_size" since different journal types might have different
representations of how the journal is stored other than just "location"
and "size".  A journal version might be a good idea though.

Since we've space, why not burn four "locators" now which is twice as
many as we need so we have some spares later on?

        uint8_t fs_journal_version;
        uint8_t fs_journal_reserved[3];
        uint32_t fs_journal_flags;
        uint64_t fs_journallocs[4];

Cheers,
Simon.