| To: | Josef Bacik <josef@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] xfsprogs: add fpunch command for hole punching via fallocate |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 18 Jan 2011 08:12:03 -0500 |
| Cc: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20110118130603.GA23491@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <1295009545-17839-1-git-send-email-josef@xxxxxxxxxx> <20110118125112.GB21440@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20110118130603.GA23491@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 08:06:03AM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote: > Sounds good. So which do we want, a new command or a new flag? Thanks, I'll wait for dave to chime in. I think we should absolutely expose it as a fallocate flag, but if there's a good reason we can also expose it as a separate command. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] xfsprogs: add fpunch command for hole punching via fallocate, Josef Bacik |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: extremely slow write performance plaintext, Cory Coager |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] xfsprogs: add fpunch command for hole punching via fallocate, Josef Bacik |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] xfsprogs: add fpunch command for hole punching via fallocate, Dave Chinner |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |