linux-ext4 - Re: [RFC] basic delayed allocation in VFS

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070728195330.GB5952@infradead.org>
Date:	Sat, 28 Jul 2007 20:53:30 +0100
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	David Chinner <dgc@....com>
Cc:	Alex Tomas <alex@...sterfs.com>, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
	ext4 development <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] basic delayed allocation in VFS

On Fri, Jul 27, 2007 at 03:07:14PM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> > It duplicates fs/mpage.c in bio building and introduces new generic API
> > (iomap, map_blocks_t, etc).
> 
> Using a new API for new functionality is a bad thing?

Depends on wht you do.  This patch is just a quickhack to shoe-horn
delalloc support into ext4.  Introducing a new abstraction is overkill.
If we really want an overhaul of the writeback path that's extent-aware,
and efficient for delalloc and unwritten extents introducing a proper
iomap-like data structure would make sense.  That beeing said I personally
hate the ubffer_head abuse for bmap data that we have in various places
as it's utterly confusing and wasting stack space, but that's a different
discussion.

-
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