[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e40b27c4-137b-4e3a-a800-d2f3027a44ca@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2023 18:34:11 +0000
From: John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
Ojaswin Mujoo <ojaswin@...ux.ibm.com>,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
Ritesh Harjani <ritesh.list@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
dchinner@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/7] iomap: Don't fall back to buffered write if the write
is atomic
On 04/12/2023 18:17, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
>> If we could just run statx on a file descriptor here then that would be
>> simpler...
> statx(fd, "", AT_EMPTY_PATH, ...); ?
I really meant that if we could only run statx on a fd then we could
know if we want DIO or buffered IO (as that is how it was opened).
Thanks,
John
Powered by blists - more mailing lists