| To: | Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@xxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH][RFC] fs: Add new pre-allocation ioctls to vfs for compatibility with legacy xfs ioctls |
| From: | Ankit Jain <me@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 19 Dec 2008 02:31:05 +0530 |
| Cc: | Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, joel.becker@xxxxxxxxxx, ocfs2-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs-masters@xxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20081217202815.GE8791@wotan.suse.de> |
| References: | <49460F88.2080408@ankitjain.org> <20081217202815.GE8791@wotan.suse.de> |
| User-agent: | Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20081112) |
Mark Fasheh wrote: > On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 01:34:24PM +0530, Ankit Jain wrote: >> 2. Should the corresponding ioctls be removed from ocfs2? > > Well, a small amount of the code in fs/ocfs2/ioctl.c can certainly go away. > Shouldn't we be talking about doing the same for xfs too? Reading the code a bit, my understanding is that as compat_ioctl is also supported and that just delegates to ioctl (ocfs2_ioctl), so we can't remove the *_RESVSP* handling. Same goes for xfs also. Does that sound fair or did I not understand it correctly? -Ankit |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: 12x performance drop on md/linux+sw raid1 due to barriers [xfs], Peter Grandi |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [PATCH v2] fs: Add new pre-allocation ioctls to vfs for compatibility with legacy xfs ioctls, Ankit Jain |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH][RFC] fs: Add new pre-allocation ioctls to vfs for compatibility with legacy xfs ioctls, Ankit Jain |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH][RFC] fs: Add new pre-allocation ioctls to vfs for compatibility with legacy xfs ioctls, Felix Blyakher |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |