On 25/02/2024 14:20, Ritesh Harjani (IBM) wrote:
John Garry <john.g.garry@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
From: Prasad Singamsetty <prasad.singamsetty@xxxxxxxxxx>
Extend statx system call to return additional info for atomic write support
support if the specified file is a block device.
Signed-off-by: Prasad Singamsetty <prasad.singamsetty@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: John Garry <john.g.garry@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
block/bdev.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
fs/stat.c | 13 ++++++-------
include/linux/blkdev.h | 5 +++--
3 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
diff --git a/block/bdev.c b/block/bdev.c
index e9f1b12bd75c..0dada9902bd4 100644
--- a/block/bdev.c
+++ b/block/bdev.c
@@ -1116,24 +1116,41 @@ void sync_bdevs(bool wait)
iput(old_inode);
}
+#define BDEV_STATX_SUPPORTED_MASK (STATX_DIOALIGN | STATX_WRITE_ATOMIC)
+
/*
- * Handle STATX_DIOALIGN for block devices.
- *
- * Note that the inode passed to this is the inode of a block device node file,
- * not the block device's internal inode. Therefore it is *not* valid to use
- * I_BDEV() here; the block device has to be looked up by i_rdev instead.
+ * Handle STATX_{DIOALIGN, WRITE_ATOMIC} for block devices.
*/
-void bdev_statx_dioalign(struct inode *inode, struct kstat *stat)
+void bdev_statx(struct dentry *dentry, struct kstat *stat, u32 request_mask)
why change this to dentry? Why not keep it as inode itself?
I suppose that I could do that.
Thanks,
John
