On Apr 17, 2007 18:25 +0530, Amit K. Arora wrote: > On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 02:14:17AM -0500, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > Wouldn't > > int fallocate(loff_t offset, loff_t len, int fd, int mode) > > work on both s390 and ppc/arm? glibc will certainly wrap it and > > reorder the arguments as needed, so there is no need to keep fd first. > > I think more people are comfirtable with this approach. Really? I thought from the last postings that "fd first, wrap on s390" was better. > Since glibc > will wrap the system call and export the "conventional" interface > (with fd first) to applications, we may not worry about keeping fd first > in kernel code. I am personally fine with this approach. It would seem to make more sense to wrap the syscall on those architectures that can't handle the "conventional" interface (fd first). > Still, if people have major concerns, we can think of getting rid of the > "mode" argument itself. Anyhow we may, in future, need to have a policy > based system call (say, for providing the goal block by applications for > performance reasons). "mode" can then be made part of it. We need at least mode="unallocate" or a separate funallocate() call to allow allocated-but-unwritten blocks to be unallocated without actually punching out written data. Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Principal Software Engineer Cluster File Systems, Inc. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
