[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 4/5] ext4: fallocate support in ext4

To: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Amit K. Arora" <aarora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, suparna@xxxxxxxxxx, cmm@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] ext4: fallocate support in ext4
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2007 19:02:32 -0400
In-reply-to: <20070507222103.GJ8181@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20070417125514.GA7574@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070418130600.GW5967@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070420135146.GA21352@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070420145918.GY355@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070424121632.GA10136@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070426175056.GA25321@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070426181332.GD7209@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070503213133.d1559f52.akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070507113753.GA5439@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070507135825.f8545a65.akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070507222103.GJ8181@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20070302)
Andreas Dilger wrote:
On May 07, 2007  13:58 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
Final point: it's fairly disappointing that the present implementation is
ext4-only, and extent-only.  I do think we should be aiming at an ext4
bitmap-based implementation and an ext3 implementation.

Actually, this is a non-issue.  The reason that it is handled for extent-only
is that this is the only way to allocate space in the filesystem without
doing the explicit zeroing.  For other filesystems (including ext3 and

Precisely /how/ do you avoid the zeroing issue, for extents?

If I posix_fallocate() 20GB on ext4, it damn well better be zeroed, otherwise the implementation is broken.


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