xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/2] fiemap: filesystem free space mapping

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/2] fiemap: filesystem free space mapping
From: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 06:15:15 +1100
Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx" <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20121024150951.GA24318@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1350537079-16246-1-git-send-email-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20121023123044.GG7341@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20121023215313.GQ4291@dastard> <20121024114711.GB11262@shiny> <20121024150951.GA24318@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 11:09:51AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 07:47:17AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > I'm all for it in the main fiemap call, it makes much more sense for the
> > users I think.
> 
> How so?  Current fiemap is a per-inode information, Daves new call is
> per-fs.  Making one a flag of another is a gross user interface.  In
> addition we're bound to get issue where filesystems fail to wire up
> fiemap to the tons of different iops just for this operation, or
> accidentally wire up "real" fiemap to things like special files or
> pipes.
> 
> Btw, I'd like t orestate that I really love to see this functionality in
> the VFS, just not multiplexed over FIEMAP.

That's fine. I just wanted to clarify what you were asking.
FIEMAPFS it is, then...

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

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