On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 21:24 +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 10:08:29AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 10:05:35AM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote: > > > 3) A version which (optionally via a flag in the wbc structure) > > > instructs write_cache_pages() to not pursue those updates. This has > > > not been written yet. > > > > This one sounds best to me (although we'd have to actualy see it..) > > something like the below ? > > diff --git a/include/linux/writeback.h b/include/linux/writeback.h > index bd91987..7599af2 100644 > --- a/include/linux/writeback.h > +++ b/include/linux/writeback.h > @@ -63,6 +63,8 @@ struct writeback_control { > unsigned for_writepages:1; /* This is a writepages() call */ > unsigned range_cyclic:1; /* range_start is cyclic */ > unsigned more_io:1; /* more io to be dispatched */ > + /* flags which control the write_cache_pages behaviour */ > + int writeback_flags; > }; Doesn't seem in line with the bitflag method currently used in struct writeback_control. -chris -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html