[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <abb87172-edce-4b81-a967-b79b061f0bae@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2025 08:12:28 +0000
From: John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc: brauner@...nel.org, djwong@...nel.org, cem@...nel.org, dchinner@...hat.com,
linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ojaswin@...ux.ibm.com,
ritesh.list@...il.com, martin.petersen@...cle.com, tytso@....edu,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 04/13] xfs: pass flags to xfs_reflink_allocate_cow()
On 18/03/2025 05:33, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 09:17:10AM +0000, John Garry wrote:
>>>
>>> Given that this is where the policy is implemented now, this comment:
>>>
>>> /*
>>> * COW fork extents are supposed to remain unwritten until we're ready
>>> * to initiate a disk write. For direct I/O we are going to write the
>>> * data and need the conversion, but for buffered writes we're done.
>>> */
>>>
>>> from xfs_reflink_convert_unwritten should probably move here now.
>>
>> ok, fine, I can relocate this comment to xfs_direct_write_iomap_begin(),
>> but please let me know if you prefer an rewording.
>
> I have to admit I found the wording a bit odd, but I failed to come up
> with something significantly better.
>
maybe when you see the code, you could have a better suggestion, but
I'll keep the wording the same verbatim for now.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists