[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <E1KTiuD-0000ej-JZ@closure.thunk.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 15:54:45 -0400
From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH, RFC] ext4-use-generic-discard-reservations-call
Does this patch make sense? I noticed that in the extents version of
the truncate, we call the mballoc-specific version of
ext4_discard_reservation(), instead of ext4_discard_reservation()
directly. As a result, if the filesystem is mounted -o nomballoc, we
won't throw away the reservation window when truncating or unlinking an
extents-based file. We are using ext4_discard_reservation() in
non-extent truncate code, which is what made me notice this.
- Ted
ext4: Use ext4_discard_reservations instead of mballoc-specific call
In ext4_ext_truncate(), we should use the more generic
ext4_discard_reservations() call so we do the right thing when the
filesystem is mounted with the nomballoc option.
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents.c b/fs/ext4/extents.c
index 3c82ab1..30a59b8 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/extents.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/extents.c
@@ -2963,7 +2963,7 @@ void ext4_ext_truncate(struct inode *inode)
down_write(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_data_sem);
ext4_ext_invalidate_cache(inode);
- ext4_mb_discard_inode_preallocations(inode);
+ ext4_discard_reservation(inode);
/*
* TODO: optimization is possible here.
--
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