[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <876359k44l.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2010 18:18:26 +0530
From: "Aneesh Kumar K. V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
Jiaying Zhang <jiayingz@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 25/28] ext4: use ext4_get_block_write in buffer write
On Tue, 2 Mar 2010 13:18:42 -0500, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu> wrote:
> __u64 len, __u64 *moved_len);
>
>
> +/* BH_Uninit flag: blocks are allocated but uninitialized on disk */
> +enum ext4_state_bits {
> + BH_Uninit /* blocks are allocated but uninitialized on disk */
> + = BH_JBDPrivateStart,
> +};
> +
> +BUFFER_FNS(Uninit, uninit)
> +
Last time we reviewed it was mentioned that this will go away. Having
both unwritten and uninit is definitely confusing.
> /*
> * Add new method to test wether block and inode bitmaps are properly
> * initialized. With uninit_bg reading the block from disk is not enough
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.h b/fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.h
> index 05eca81..b79ad51 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.h
> +++ b/fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.h
> @@ -304,4 +304,28 @@ static inline int ext4_should_writeback_data(struct inode *inode)
> return 0;
> }
I was hoping that we will get another post of the DIO changes before
merge.
-anesh
--
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