[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <69B76939-CAAD-4F43-BE9F-6C3CA3ECCF5E@cam.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2007 09:30:17 +0100
From: Anton Altaparmakov <aia21@....ac.uk>
To: Andreas Dilger <adilger@...sterfs.com>
Cc: David Chinner <dgc@....com>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Filesystems <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
xfs@....sgi.com, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] add FIEMAP ioctl to efficiently map file allocation
On 2 May 2007, at 09:23, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> On 1 May 2007, at 23:30, Andreas Dilger wrote:
>
>> On May 01, 2007 14:22 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 04:44:01PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
>>>> Hmm, I'd thought "offline" would migrate to EXTENT_UNKNOWN, but
>>>> I didn't
>>>
>>> I disagree - why would you want to indicate the state is unknown
>>> when we know
>>> very well that it is offline?
>>
>> If you don't like "UNKNOWN", what about "UNMAPPED"? I just want a
>> catch-all flag that indicates "this extent contains data but there is
>> nothing sensible to be returned for the extent mapping."
>
> I like UNMAPPED. I even use it in NTFS internally for extents maps
> that have not been read into memory yet. (-:
Oops, I use NOT_MAPPED in NTFS rather than UNMAPPED but I still like
UNMAPPED, too. (-:
Best regards,
Anton
--
Anton Altaparmakov <aia21 at cam.ac.uk> (replace at with @)
Unix Support, Computing Service, University of Cambridge, CB2 3QH, UK
Linux NTFS maintainer, http://www.linux-ntfs.org/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists