> loff_t size;
> unsigned long len;
> + int ret;
> struct file *file = vma->vm_file;
> struct inode *inode = file->f_path.dentry->d_inode;
> struct address_space *mapping = inode->i_mapping;
> + handle_t *handle;
> + get_block_t *get_block;
> + int retries = 0;
>
> /*
> + * This check is racy but catches the common case. We rely on
> + * __block_page_mkwrite() to do a reliable check.
> */
> + vfs_check_frozen(inode->i_sb, SB_FREEZE_WRITE);
> + /* Delalloc case is easy... */
> + if (test_opt(inode->i_sb, DELALLOC) &&
> + !ext4_should_journal_data(inode) &&
> + !ext4_nonda_switch(inode->i_sb)) {
> + do {
> + ret = __block_page_mkwrite(vma, vmf,
> + ext4_da_get_block_prep);
> + } while (ret == -ENOSPC &&
> + ext4_should_retry_alloc(inode->i_sb, &retries));
> + goto out_ret;
Is there any way to simply provide a different vm_operations_struct
and thus ->fault implementation for the delalloc vs non-delalloc case?
I think splitting those two cases completely would make the code a lot
more readable, even if there is a tiny amount of code duplication.
--
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
