[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1182991988.15488.95.camel@edge.yarra.acx>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 10:53:08 +1000
From: Nathan Scott <nscott@...nex.com>
To: David Chinner <dgc@....com>
Cc: Andreas Dilger <adilger@...sterfs.com>, xfs-oss <xfs@....sgi.com>,
"Amit K. Arora" <aarora@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
suparna@...ibm.com, cmm@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7][TAKE5] support new modes in fallocate
On Thu, 2007-06-28 at 10:39 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
>
>
> I don't think it does - swapfile I/O looks like it goes direct to
> bio without passing through the filesystem. When the swapfile is
> mapped, it scans and records the extent map of the entire swapfile
> in a separate structure and AFAICT the swap code uses that built map
> without touching the filesystem at all.
>
> If that is true then the written/unwritten state of the extents is
> irrelevant; all we need is allocated disk space for the file and
> swapping should work. And it's not like anyone should be reading
> the contents of that swapfile through the filesystem, either. ;)
Ah, yes, good point - thats true. Unwritten extents are ideal for
this then, as attempts to read swap via the regular interfaces will
return zeros instead of random swapped out memory contents.
cheers.
-
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