[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110401003450.GD7484@dhcp231-156.rdu.redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 20:34:50 -0400
From: Josef Bacik <josef@...hat.com>
To: Josef Bacik <josef@...hat.com>,
Sunil Mushran <sunil.mushran@...cle.com>,
Tristan Ye <tristan.ye@...cle.com>, ocfs2-devel@....oracle.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, chris.mason@...cle.com, tm@....ma
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] VFS/ioctl: Add punching-hole support to ioctl().
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 04:44:55PM -0700, Joel Becker wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 06:56:18PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 02:14:43PM -0700, Sunil Mushran wrote:
> > > Frankly I see no point extending the ioctl interface when we have
> > > a syscall interface.
> > >
> >
> > I'd even go so far as to say we could probably axe the xfs and ocfs2 ioctls
> > since we have the fallocate interface :). Thanks,
>
> These ioctls are in long use. Granted, it is for the small
> subset of users that know xfs and ocfs2 can do this, but still.
> <venkman>Breaking userspace is *bad*.</venkman>
Yeah I wasn't serious, though I do wish there was a way to mark these sort of
interfaces deprecated to give us a path to retire old interfaces.
> More interesting would be to bring the ioctls up to generic code
> and have them backended by fallocate. I'm not sure they map without
> looking deeper, but it's at least an idea.
>
I just did a cursory look and it seems like that would work out ok. Thanks,
Josef
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists