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: <46AC8370.8050308@clusterfs.com>
Date:	Sun, 29 Jul 2007 16:09:20 +0400
From:	Alex Tomas <alex@...sterfs.com>
To:	David Chinner <dgc@....com>
CC:	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

David Chinner wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 27, 2007 at 11:51:56AM +0400, Alex Tomas wrote:
> But this is really irrelevant - the issue at hand is what we want
> for VFS level delalloc support. IMO, that mechanism needs to support
> both XFS and ext4, and I'd prefer if it doesn't perpetuate the
> bufferhead abuses of the past (i.e. define an iomap structure
> instead of overloading bufferheads yet again).

I'm not sure I understand very well. where would you track uptodate,
dirty and other states then? do you propose to separate block states
from block mapping?

thanks, Alex


-
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