xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Interface for the new fallocate() system call

To: Jörn Engel <joern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Interface for the new fallocate() system call
From: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 14:55:38 +0200
Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@xxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Amit K. Arora" <aarora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, suparna@xxxxxxxxxx, cmm@xxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20070330104449.GA9371@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20070301183445.GA7911@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070316143101.GA10152@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070316161704.GE8525@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070317111036.GC29931@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070321120425.GA27273@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070329115126.GB7374@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070329101010.7a2b8783.akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070330071929.GC8365@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <17932.54606.323431.491736@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070330104449.GA9371@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: mutt-ng/devel-r804 (Linux)
On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 12:44:49PM +0200, Jörn Engel wrote:
> On Fri, 30 March 2007 19:15:58 +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> > It does mean extra unnecessary work for 64-bit platforms, though...
> 
> Wouldn't that work be confined to fallocate()?  If I understand Heiko
> correctly, the alternative would slow s390 down for every syscall,
> including more performance-critical ones.

That is correct.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>