xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 2/6][TAKE7] fallocate() implementation in i386, x86_64 and po

To: "Amit K. Arora" <aarora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6][TAKE7] fallocate() implementation in i386, x86_64 and powerpc
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 15:46:12 +0100
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, tytso@xxxxxxx, cmm@xxxxxxxxxx, suparna@xxxxxxxxxx, adilger@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, dgc@xxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20070713141858.GB27291@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Mail-followup-to: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Amit K. Arora" <aarora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, tytso@xxxxxxx, cmm@xxxxxxxxxx, suparna@xxxxxxxxxx, adilger@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, dgc@xxxxxxx
References: <20070713123816.GA18000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070713124755.GB22961@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070713132118.GA23256@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070713141858.GB27291@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 07:48:58PM +0530, Amit K. Arora wrote:
> Ok. Since we have only one flag (FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE) and we do not want
> to declare the default mode (FALLOC_ALLOCATE), we can _just_ have this
> flag and remove the other mode too (FALLOC_RESV_SPACE).
> Is this what you are suggesting ?

Yes.

> Should we need a header file just to declare one flag - i.e.
> FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE (since now there is no point of declaring the two
> modes) ? If "linux/fs.h" is not a good place, will "asm-generic/fcntl.h"
> be a sane place for this flag ?

It might sound a litte silly but is the cleanest thing we could do by
far.  And I suspect there will be more more flags soon..


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