[lkml]   [2001]   [Nov]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: ext3 vs resiserfs vs xfs
On Nov 07, 2001  15:33 -0800, Ryan Cumming wrote:
> On November 7, 2001 12:25, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > If both ext2 and ext3 are compiled into the kernel, then ext3 will try
> > first to mount the root fs. If there is no journal on this fs (check this
> > with tune2fs -l <dev>, and look for "has_journal" feature), then it will be
> > mounted as ext2. If you are doing strange things with initrd and modules,
> Is there any particular reason why the ext3 driver can't handle mounting both
> ext2 and ext3 filesystems?

Not really - just an implementation issue. At one point (long ago) I had
started putting in support for this. However, the consensus is that some
people will still want to use the less complex ext2 code instead of ext3
that pretends to be ext2. I imagine that eventually support for mounting
unjournaled ext2 filesystems with the ext3 driver will be added, but there
is no pressing need - you can always use the ext2 driver. Yes, it takes
a bit more memory to have both loaded, but most people who switch to ext3
don't use ext2 filesystems anymore anyways.

Cheers, Andreas
Andreas Dilger

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:13    [W:0.101 / U:0.220 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site