On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 05:02:57PM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote: > That's kind of why I liked it in inode_setattr better. > > But if the filesystem defines its own ->setattr, then it could simply > not define a ->setsize and do the right thing in setattr. So this > calling convention seems not too bad. Or the filesystem could just call into it's own setattr method internally. For that we'd switch back to passing the iattr to ->setsize. For a filesystem that doesn't do anything special for ATTR_SIZE ->setsize could point to the same function as ->setattr. For filesystem where's it's really different they could be separate or share helpers. -- 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
