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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20070728195605.GC5952@infradead.org>
Date:	Sat, 28 Jul 2007 20:56:05 +0100
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Alex Tomas <alex@...sterfs.com>
Cc:	David Chinner <dgc@....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 11:51:56AM +0400, Alex Tomas wrote:
> >Secondly, apart from delalloc, XFS cannot use the generic code paths
> >for writeback because unwritten extent conversion also requires
> >custom I/O completion handlers. Given that __mpage_writepage() only
> >calls ->writepage when it is confused, XFS simply cannot use this
> >API.
> 
> this doesn't mean fs/mpage.c should go, right?

mpage.c read side is fine for every block based filesystem I know.
mpage.c write side is fine for every simple (non-delalloc, non-unwritten
extent, etc) filesystem.  So it surely shouldn't go.

> I didn't say "generic", see Subject: :)

then it shouldn't be in generic code.

-
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